Part of Society? - For Akzle

[oneofsix]

Bahahaha... So barking up the wrong tree there, but so amusing nonetheless.

If it hadn't have been the wrong tree it wouldn't be amusing

That time of the month, is it love?

It would be the mercury he had for lunch

[Akzle]

Hmmm ... been there, done that - it does tend to diminish the credibility of your arguments.

you're going to throw arguments out based on the fact that the guy putting them forward smokes dope?
what if i had a prescription for.. i don't know, tramadol, and was making the same arguments?

I don't seriously expect you to go somewhere else - I was attempting, in a somewhat subtle and experiential learning way, to suggest that it does not matter where you go in the world today, there is always some system, souime country, some lasws, which will be applied to you ...

and you're probably not wrong. but i'm not going to voluntarily apply them to myself. given that the basis of (democratic) governance is (perceived) consent and representation, and in the case of my person, both are missing.

we do all, however, come under the jurisdiction of a higher authority.

The Government has authority becase the citizens of New Zealand choose to grant them that autrhority ... I don';t necessarily accept that as a philosophical or political position - I only accept the practicalities of it .. adn I count deviants as part of society - nto as a separate part .. they are deviants not exiles ...

1) i don't claim the title "citizen", nor do i grant anyone, let alone the government, authority over myself.
2) while this may be "practically" the case, that doesn't mean it's as it should be, also, i do not find it to be the case, i do what the hell i want, irrespective of what government is governing.
3) as for calling "deviants" part of society.. i'd differentiate. the guy saying "fuck the pigs" is a deviant within society. the guy (me) saying "crown policy enforcement has no lawful jurisdiction over me", not so much, eh

"rights" are a fiction...ask a starving African child just how his rights are today .. the whole of human history shows that people only have what they are prepared to fight and die for ...

an african kid has the same birth rights as anyone else. for a start, the right to life, liberty, possession, freedom of association, freedom of movement. just because they may not be in a socio-political/demographic to make full advantage of those rights, doesn't mean they aren't there.

And I am not talking "right to defend myself" I am talking armed and capable .. (And no, anarchy is not "no governance ...")

1) you seem to be repeatedly chest thumping on this one. you've got guns (me too) who have you shot for the rights you claim? (shall we have a paintball match to see who would live through the meeting?)
2)
Main Entry: an·ar·chy
Pronunciation: \ˈa-nər-kē, -ˌnär-\
Function: noun
1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
i'm guessing C is what you're going for?, it comes after a and b.
or do you have a definition to add?

you have to agree any rights and duties are also legal fictions ..

duties, yes. rights, no. as above, life liberty etc. i would put forward, though, you also have a natural duty not to infringe on anyone elses rights.

Naaa bro .. No creator ...

fundamental difference, but i think you contradict yourself (below)
...but a radical plural democracy would never take that form ..

and we don't have it

Huh ???

and becaue we don't have it, you can't say it's good, or it works, as you can't point to a working example.

But it appears you see that as an individual thing .. whuile I work for the greater freedom of all ...

i give people the knowledge to free themselves, maybe the ideal, i don't see it as my duty to fight the good fight for people who may or may not want it.

To a certain extent you are right ... I could throw the old hippie line at you "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose"

hippy? that was joplin...

I have accepted the loss of some freedom to be involved in changing the system - and I have accepted the loss of some small freedom as a requirermwent of avoiding the consequences of my rebel and deviant actions ..

that's your choice, as a free-thinking adult.

Mate - it has changed heaps ... I grew up in the 50s and 60s .. and the changes are radical - too long to list ...

(pass)

I agree that change friom within is a slower process than armed revolution - but it does happen - and it does not require the violence of armed revolution (which I support in the right piolitcial and historic circumstances.)

you can't support something in an historical context. it either happened or it did not, if you agree with it, bully for you, if you don't, bully for you. (what's done is done, what's not been done 's not been done, let it be...)

so, do you think you're going to achieve your ideal of anarchism, from within the system you're wanting to be rid of?

each election year I first decide whether I'm goign to vote or not, and then I rmemebr how many opeopel died to give peopel thje vote ..

some kind of duty there huh?
and i'm guessing you're playing the darkie card too. that's fine, that's whats made you you and if you think that's whats best, i'm not going to convince you otherwise...

- but spelling is just one of those rule things y'know ...

you rebel you, speeling engrish badly.

I'm arguing from functional occurence with practical references points. ...we are not talking about the legal fictionof a country...

no, but the territory is a fiction. it may be an island (or five or six, however many NZ territory is (tokelau, niue etc)), it's claimed political territory. it's a border/ boundary.

Goals? I am unsure where that comes from - I never thought we had "common goals" ...

that's of the legal definition of society. unless you've got a better one.. it'll stand. i don't think that what most people point to as "society", does have common goals.

Yes .. and some of us have been pissed off at that for 200 years - So - are you one of the immigrants? Ngā mihi ki a koe ...

couldn't rightly say. pretty sure i'm from earth (some might snigger) you personally haven't been alive 200 years, so you're claiming the fued of your fathers....

Oh? It would seem that it is clearly defined by our coast line ... i
and it was first legally defined (Yes, I accept theat it is legally defined accurding to your rules) by us, the tangata whenua in 1835 in the Declaration of Independence,

not my rules. new zealand legislation. crown law. and, strictly speaking, it's defined as the territorial waters of NZ, not the land. did the 1835 declaration (it got royal assent, did it not?) specify niue? the chathams? raoul? or just a couple of big bits of rock pulled up by rangi with his granny's jaw?

"This is Ours" it is not a fiction in ours - but it is real, we stand on it, it has been handed down from mai rāno ...

yeah. i say that about the whole rock (earth)

There is not higher power or creator in my worldview.
what privileges human beings over other life forms in the natural world?

from whence came you? is your consciousness merely a physiological product of mum and dad having a shag?

priviledges over... i wouldn't pick those words.
i claim the right to kill and eat shit, be it plant or animal (and i don't differentiate, they're both alive, and i kill them to eat them) asides from that, i am part of an ecosystem, come what may.

Good luck on the Gixxer with no rego ... you will eventually run into the enforcement agencies .. (unless you have it on display in the stting room) ... then you will see just how much you are not part of the system ...

have and do. (there is no R, just GSX) it's not always easy. cops aren't actually taught law. they're taught to write tickets. sometimes my winning smile does it, sometimes i have to argue the tickets elsewise. refusing to "identify myself" leads to detainment by dickhead cops, boring and unprofitable for me.

Good luck with that ... I've come pretty close in the past ... still got stuck with paying rates - but I could have lived off my land .. food, water and energy were all avaliable ...

well, you accept the system. you accept that the crowns claim to alloidal title (bullshit on the "daddy gave me this land", what good are those guns of yours eh?) and can thus charge you for the occupation of it.

the reality is that we are surrounded by law makers and law enforces .. so to avoid the unwanted consequences of my actions I fly under the radar ... it is more freeing to avoid being involved in the court processes than to take them on head on ... it's avoidance rather than acquiescence.

i think you misunderstand acquiescence. that implies lying down and taking it. yes, it's basically headbutting a wall, fighting a well financed and precedented system, however unjust and corrupt. and i have no objection to KYFHD (keep yr f*ing head down)
this is the difference though, you accept that the system will persist, so you give up and work with it, i reckon we would see some change if everyone started interacting with cops and government as i do, and i think that's the only way we'll see change.

I am a part of this whenua ... this whenua feeds me, clothes me, provides me with shelter and water. Papatuanuku is here, in this motu....

so you accept a creator. you accept a system larger than yourself, that your consciousness is part of a bigger system (and separate from your body) you accept that what you need to live, you'll have, by the grace of "god" (why the mother and not the father?)

You may be a citizen of the earth - I am a descendent of Rangi and Papa, of Tane, of Hine Titama, who became Hinenui Te Po ... I am a descendent of this whenua ...

((oh, there's dad)) aren't we all?

By not voting you are giving up any power you have to influence decisions that affect you directly .. is this a good thing?

do i? i don't think there's anyone in parliament or likely to get there that's going to bring about the things i want to see.

you could try driving across "private land" (as an anarchist I abhor the concept of "private land" ) but see how the land owners react ...

i'm with you on the private/ownership bit., better i use the roads eh?

But mainly you should not use public roads which are for "everyone" because you claim you are not part of "everyone" ..

i am part of "everyone" just not "society"

Yeah .. Naaa bro .. they are visitors

i don't draw that fiction ("visitor"). they are earthlings. they have the same right to their 6billionth as me and mine.


I once thought very close to you - it was a long time ago .. then I changed - not because I accepted the hegemonic bullshit of a corrupt system - I accepted the practical realities of my life .. that pathway does not lead to change and improvement.

that is your choice, your path. i'll keep to mine, it's working for me so far.

My goal is to improvfe life for all human beings - and that is not possible from outside the system, where I was only throwing stones at glass houses, as it where.

i disagree. i think outside, where the real people, not the corporate persons, not the "society"s, not the legal bullshit are, is where the system needs to be attacked from.

we need the radicals outside, but we also need the agents inside

game on!

[Banditbandit]

Whew ... that's getting way long .. some highlights

you're going to throw arguments out based on the fact that the guy putting them forward smokes dope?
what if i had a prescription for.. i don't know, tramadol, and was making the same arguments?

Yes !!! Chemical change in the brain affects judgement etc etc and theefore the credibility of any argument - no distinction between Government-declared illicit chemicals and legitmated prescribed chemicals ..

the right to life, liberty, possession, freedom of association, freedom of movement.

None of these things have been granted as a right - they have al been fought for . and after the fight have been deemed to be rights. That deeming to be rights does not make them rights ... that's bullshit words on paper ... only the desire to fight for them makes them enforcable ... and the ability to make that happen (i.e. apply force) is where the guns come in ...

Main Entry: an·ar·chy
Pronunciation: \ˈa-nər-kē, -ˌnär-\
Function: noun
1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
i'm guessing C is what you're going for?, it comes after a and b.
or do you have a definition to add?

Naaa .. none fo those definitions .. Read Rocker, Proudhon, Malatesta ...

Anarchy is the political system formed by 100% agreement of all those involved - and MAY involve some for of structure - btr only with the agreementof 100% opf the people involved - Anarchy is much like Marxism .. execpt we disagree with the marxist position of historical materialism ... Marx's problem is with Capitalism ..adn he said that you smash the captalist state, establish a social state, which becomes a communist state which will eventually fade away and leavge the dictatorship of the proletariat (don't get hung up on the name ...) Anarchists do have a problem with the Caouitalist state, but the bigger problem is ith the state which will necesarily become an elite-ukled body - so at the moment of revolution whjy set up a socialist state? WOr a comunist state - they ahve all becoem elite heirachies .. adn will never fade away

At the moment of revolution you can move directly to forming the dictatorship of the proletariat (don't get hung up on the name - read Marx's description) ..


No, we do not have a raqdical plural democracy - I hope we are movign toward that .. It's a goal ... an aspirational goal .. simply saying we do not have it means it wil never happen - and the status quo wil remain ...

hippy? that was joplin...

It was actually Kris Kristofferson ..

so you're claiming the fued of your fathers....

Yes - maybe - in your terms ... in my worldview no, I am not .. "We" is all of the iwi - past present and future .. which in our worldview is different - the past is before us ... our words for the past = Mai Rāno - the days come again .. Ngā ra o mua - the days in front ... We have a different sense of time and a different sense of belong and a different sense of "us" from the immigrant populations ..

so you accept a creator.

No. I said descended from ... not created by ...

saying "crown policy enforcement has no lawful jurisdiction over me",

Yeah - some deviants are a little more "outside" but only a little more on the fringe - never completely outside ..

But I agree with yor statement. It is my position - the law has no authority over me - I choose the appear to obey the law because I'm dodging consequences ... the quieter option ...

Happy for you to bang your head against the wall for us .. I prefer to not have a headache ... and I can play the sane voice inside the system saying "deal with me or I'll get that mad headbanger back ..."

you can't support something in an historical context. it either happened or it did not

Naa bro - I mean that in the Marxist sense of Historical Materialsim ... and the historic moment of any society as it is occuring .. not history as in the past ...

And as for the spellign - it's a non-neorutypical thing ...

Hey - good discussion - bit of fun .. I'm off for the weekend ... Going fishing tomorrow ...

have a good one and take care ..

[Akzle]

You have no idea how people have lived their lives nor how they got to "here" what games of chess have been played, what risks have been taken, nor what sacrifices have been made, by people that live by their own rules.
You still don't have that explanation for why you're on the interwebs but yet trying to get off the grid. I'm still laughing!

Sorry, but this is hardly "inspiring", dude.

well, i can't force you to be inspired, if you'd rather pick holes, go right ahead. simply because i don't agree with someones belief doesn't mean i cannot engage with them to our mutual benefit. i'm off the power grid, the supermarket grid, the taxman grid etc. i missed the sign that said internet wasn't allowed.

Admitting that you grow buds on a public forum is not a sensible idea.

the local cops know who i am, where i am and what i do. if they see me doing dumb shit on the road, they're usually waiting in my driveway when i get home.

To say "I am not part of your society, I reject your law's' is fairly easy when hidden behind the anonymity of an internet pseudonym. Akzle do you have the courage of your convictions? You openly admit to many things our, or in your opinion, MY society, deems illegal. If you truly believe what you say in your green diatribes then post your real name and see what happens.

Put up, or shut up

been there done that bro. go fish. see the phone number down the bottom? give me a call...
(ps. i am legitimately known as akzle, too.)

Mr A will just tell the popo he's not part of their society. They'll nod sagely and walk away.

No rules man!

pretty much. but sometimes they're a bit more obtuse than that.

]You redeemed yourself with the no dealing.

i don't see what it matters. there's a demand in the free market (amongst otherwise "law abiding" citizens), i can fill it.
which is the lesser weevil? me, or the mongrel mob?

you are dangerous to the rest of people around you. You justify your actions based on your "right" to not fit in with the rest of society. What if your actions are harmful to the rest of us? Is it still acceptable for you to carry them out?

i dont do it. simple. i take responsibility for what i do, what i don't do. the guiding principals of common law free-e-dom: do no harm to others, do no harm to property, and honour your contracts. they're basically my starting point in the morning.

a nation is ideally made up of like minded individuals who strive to live together . Whether the system is optimum for this to happen or not, we all have to live together and agree upon common rules to avoid chaos and get along (Thou shalt not steal, etc)

exactly. but pray, what about the 11 thousand bits of "legislation" that go beyond? : do no harm to person, property and tell the truth", what more "rules" do ya need? every faith has rules in a similar vein, the pillars of islam, the vedic doctrine, the ten commandments, all specify what's fundamentally "right" - asides from it being inscribed on our DNA, and asides from the fact that if you have to infringe upon someone elses natural rights, you're probably in the wrong.

Do you get where I'm going with this? I'm not doubting you do cos I certainly don't think you're stupid. Maybe just a little obstinate.[/COLOR]

i don't really get where you're going. your beliefs and worldview are based on the journey that's bought you here. i don't know what it is, i probably disagree with most of it, but if you're happy then i'm happy. i don't expect you'll drop everything and go live in a bush hut, but that's my path. i also don't buy into "society's" way of shelving responsibility, blaming someone/thing else and i believe that humans have the fundamental capacity to be good, but the socio-political environment they've been raised by has led them off the good path.

i am obstinate.

Once again, with that approach, how are you part of the solution rather than of the problem?
In these countries, it has been well proven that the supply in sick fucktards as head of states is plentiful. Like the Chimera, you cut one head and two will sprout out just as vicious as the previous one.

i'd say so. the PEOPLE vote with rifles, rather than ballots, the politicians are held to account. (fuckup = get shot, what?! you can't recall selling out?! = get shot.) most of the "sick fucktards" were put in place as puppet governments by "higher" governments - mainly the US for monetary gain.

It is a privilege worth fighting for, and something I think you might be taking for granted.

privilege? i need to be granted the privilege to say and think what i want?
who do i have to beg for that? do i get a "free thought license"? do i need to register for it?

holy broken HTML, batman!

I think the thing that irks me about Mr Akzle's position can be boiled down to this:

Mr Akzle's position (as I understand it) is "I am not part of New Zealand society: your rules do not apply to me, your laws and customs and government and all that other garbage are fiction. I am apart from the rest of you."

So, at first blush, that seems like at least an arguable position: participation is voluntary, this is a democracy, and I am a free person and I can do what I want.

good so far....

Because by engaging with it, you are participating in it, while saying you are not part of it.

i disagree. again with the fruit shop analogy. engaging does not imply subjugation, or consent to the ideals of the fruit seller, or the fruits, for that matter.

It seems to me to be the classical case of cognitive dissonance: this is a psychological condtion...Mr Akzle is mentally ill. My view is that Mr Akzle appreciates the intellectual dishonesty of his position, but chooses not to engage with it.

and my view is that you're well and truly deluded. it may ease your mind to dismiss me under the flag of "mental disorder", hell, you might be right, throw some narcissism, solipsism, and a superiority complex in there, and we've got the Akzle cocktail, unfortunately it doens't reduce the inherent validity of anything i say.

Shirley, if Mr Akzle was sincere in his belief about a "society of one" for want of a better description, then disengaging entirely would be the intellectually honest approach.

a) i'm not after a "society of one"
b) even if i was, why is that concept mutually exclusive with engaging other society? that's like saying because NZs minimum wage is 12$ we can't engage with china who don't have labour laws.
hum?

Find some land somewhere, and using nothing other than own hands, mind and labour, build, trade, and defend your own "patch". And you can't do it in the fictional New Zealand, because, mate, we're already here, and we claim it. And between us, we own more guns than you. "Us" of course in this context meaning the rest of New Zealand at large.

yes but the rest of NZ doesn't have as tripped up view as you. i don't accept your claim to it. i don't accept it's lawful. you insist you're a lawful, democratic, representative government, so prove your claim is lawful...
and why should i not make use of tools, exactly?

In fact, not even the most deluded of the Maori separatists are advancing a position akin to yours, Mr Akzle, and they arguably would have stronger claim to advancing it than anyone else, should they choose to. Of course they'd still be wrong, just not as wrong as you.

uhh.. you don't follow the news much. heard of this place called "uruwera"?

Also: sushi for lunch. Superb.

i do enjoy sushi. salmon. nomnom.

That is Island Akzle trades with other societies (mainland NZ for example). But I do think your point is well made: to engage at all implies social interaction which is a characteristic of "society".

so. my ass is white and perfectly round, so are rockmelons, therefore because my arse has the characteristics of "rock melons", it must be a rock melon?

how the hell did you survive law school?

Then we can all get a good grounding in the area, and deal with the fact that people have been thinking about, and writing about, this shit for 4000 years. In fact probably for as long as people have been thinking, and writing.

why are you looking back for a solution? shouldn't you be a bit more forward thinking?
you're not even looking for a solution, really, because the status quo is so profitable for you.
so if people have genuinely been looking to this kind of shit for that long, how is it that nothing has changed?

Then we'll talk. Oh yes. It'll be like the US Constitutional Congress (but with less hookers and whiskey)

i retain the right to hookers and whiskey.

[Akzle]

-edit- f*ckf*ckf*ck

[007XX]

-edit- f*ckf*ckf*ck

I think I shall just agree to disagree with you on a few points. Besides, you'd be surprised how much of what you say I agree with, on principal.

I just don't believe that you can be outside of society while living amongst it.

PS: Enjoyed that reference to Master and Commander too by the way.

[scumdog]

// the reason you have 12000 posts, scum puppy, is that you can't seem to fucken multiquote. you take 4 posts to say what most people would in one, and all of it is shit.

gtfo my thread.[/COLOR]

Touchy little fucker, ain't ya!

And multiquotes are so over-rated plus a lot of the time it's off-putting reading posts with too many included in them, but I guess you know all about THAT eh!

[mashman]

[98tls]

Dear oh fucking dear,meant to tune in yesterday but forgot all about(thank fuck).No doubt Akzle welcomed the internet with open arms,you must have got well bored with getting a smack in the mouth before it came along eh.

[Edbear]

It used to be, then it went a tad dismal.

However, it would seem things are on the up.

Still some pathetic little children hanging around, though. They're easy to ignore though as they won't reveal themselves by posting in any serious discussion these days.

Would be nice to get some of the originals back posting again.

I'm trying to understand where Axzle is coming from, but he's a slippery blighter, I think he's mainly a troll for his own amusement.

[mashman]

Still some pathetic little children hanging around, though. They're easy to ignore though as they won't reveal themselves by posting in any serious discussion these days.

Would be nice to get some of the originals back posting again.

I'm trying to understand where Axzle is coming from, but he's a slippery blighter, I think he's mainly a troll for his own amusement.

KB, rough, smooth, dickheads... meh.

meh.

I'm going for concerned human being with an insight that most can't fathom because they don't have the imagination and/or forethought to think outwith that which they have been taught. The blue pill looks nice and tastes minty fresh too (and is generally accompanies with a tax break)

[007XX]

Still some pathetic little children hanging around, though. They're easy to ignore though as they won't reveal themselves by posting in any serious discussion these days.

Would be nice to get some of the originals back posting again.

I'm trying to understand where Axzle is coming from, but he's a slippery blighter, I think he's mainly a troll for his own amusement.

Re: KB ...it is what it is. I've had a few giggles on here over the last couple of days, which is more than I can say for the last couple of years on here.

And re: Akzle. To be fair, a bad guy is often what makes this place fun. A common disliked troll I found just seems to drag everyone together and creates some heated and interesting debates. He ain't so bad

[scumdog]

And re: Akzle. To be fair, a bad guy is often what makes this place fun. A common disliked troll I found just seems to drag everyone together and creates some heated and interesting debates. He ain't so bad

Ain't so good niether - but that's what makes him 'fun' in a perverted way.

Sorta like the village idiot use to be back in the days of horses, swords and ducking-stools..

[Edbear]

Ain't so good niether - but that's what makes him 'fun' in a perverted way.

Sorta like the village idiot use to be back in the days of horses, swords and ducking-stools..

The old village idiot wouldn't use so many words though. Would make as much sense, just in fewer words...

[007XX]

Ain't so good niether - but that's what makes him 'fun' in a perverted way.
.

Well, you know me and my sense of humour.