PostHeaderIcon America reborn – My Main Error

As you may have noticed, I have had little to say on this topic lately. That is because it did not seem worth the effort. Then it dawned on me why… I have been focused on what SHOULD be done when the real question is, what CAN be done.

Said another way, what might a few people like ourselves actually suggest that would motivate others to get involved? A list of my initial suggestions follows:

–> ??

–> ??

That’s about all I have. Sorry.

Troy L Robinson

23 Responses to “America reborn – My Main Error”

  • ◄Dave► says:

    Beats me, Troy. If we can’t motivate each other, how could we ever hope to motivate Thoreau’s hapless sheeple, leading lives of quiet desperation?

    I can’t even motivate my friends and readers to follow a link, in hopes that they might come to see what I see, or at least rationally discuss true Liberty with me. You have said it yourself. Sheeple want and perhaps need to be led. Thus, a laissez faire stateless society, without a ruling structure forcefully maintaining law and order, appears to be as distasteful to you, as that IBM experiment in leaderless individual self-motivation.

    I am again becoming accustomed to penning thoughtful soliloquies here for my own amusement, and exercising my penchant for lively debate in comment sections elsewhere. I am occasionally reminded that others sometimes find wisdom herein, and a few minds have been known to change. I suppose that should be reward enough, for my writing hobby. 😉 ◄Dave►

  • Jeannine Daigneault says:

    I agree with Dave that it’s discouraging to be realizing what’s happening to our country and so few around us are too busy (?) to get informed enough to realize it. And it may seem as though your posts here go unnoticed, but for folks like me, I enjoy the mental stimulus that comes from thinkers like you and Dave. You probably don’t see more replies to your posts because it’s difficult for us (well, me anyhow) to add to the discussion in a meaningful way. However, I’ve learned much from digesting this material and have tried to share some in conversations with others. Don’t stop!

    • ◄Dave► says:

      Thanks for the encouragement, Saint J9. I do wish you would jump into the discussions more often. I have always found your comments thoughtful and they have been much appreciated. 😀 ◄Dave►

  • Troy Robinson says:

    My experience, at IBM and in life in general, is that most people want and need to be led. They have neither the desire or the talent to be leaders.

    In close situations, most people seem to have some good instincts as to who is worth following. However, the more distant the relationship between leader and the followers, the less effective the followers are at choosing their leaders (consider the current presidential contest).

    Could it be as simple as needing much smaller closely knit organizations?

    Can organizations and governments actually become too big to succeed? I suspect so.

    Then there is another aspect to leadership. It has been my experience that good leaders tend to think much farther into the future than followers who tend to think only of the immediate.

    I suppose my summary is that we need some level of leadership and that, in turn, requires some level of organization. It is the process of choosing leaders that I see as the current failure point.

    But I lack any immediate ideas as to a fix.

    Troy

    • ◄Dave► says:

      Perhaps this explains why I have always been a stranger in a strange land. I have never had the slightest interest in following a leader. I was a misfit as a soldier, because I was never impressed by rank. As a technician, I could only respect those at least as competent at my job as I was, whatever their rank. Even then, I accepted them as my boss; but never looked up to them as a ‘leader.’ I am just not a follower, and I guess I can’t relate to those who are.

      I never had any difficulty being a leader, when required by my position, either in the Army, as an employee, or especially as an employer; but it never went to my head, because I never really aspired to be one. I was always more interested in manipulating or fixing ‘things’ than people. It wasn’t until I learned to regard minds as complicated instruments, the workings of which could be learned, directed, and even reprogrammed when necessary, that I became at all interested in dealing with such.

      I take your point on size and proximity; but I would suggest that one of the things we might do for sheeple, is to teach them to suspect the rhetorical nonsense that government is a necessary evil. If they are inclined to buy it anyway, then they should be convinced that it is far more evil than necessary. They must regard politicians as merely perfunctory civil servants. They are at best managers, hired to perform a supposed necessary function for society. They are not potentates they must obey, or even leaders, whose vision of some glorious future for society, they are somehow required to follow. 😉 ◄Dave►

  • Troy Robinson says:

    At this point, I seriously doubt my ability to convince anyone of anything.

    BTW, all my life I have been a natural leader but never relished the role. I did not like the feeling of being more responsible for others than they were for themselves.

    As an IBM manager, I developed the habit of arriving at work an hour after normal starting time. That way, my team would have already started handing whatever cropped up overnight — whereas, when I got there on time, everyone already there would be waiting for me to make the decisions for them.

    Troy

  • Troy Robinson says:

    The real question is, why do we even care?

    Because I was privileged to live and prosper in America during her years of greatness. I would very much like my children, grandchildren, etc. to be able to do the same.

    Where else would an ignorant Arkie get to spend 37 years playing with tomorrow’s technology and sending rockets to the moon at IBM? And, how could one not be sad to see such opportunities fading away for such as I?

    Troy

    • ◄Dave► says:

      …I was privileged to live and prosper in America…

      I understand your point; but I personally would not have used the term “privileged.” The usual connotation implies a revokable permission ‘granted’ by an ‘authority,’ which rubs my ever contumacious mind the wrong way. 😉

      Then, I would ask what precisely you mean by ‘America?’ The term can refer to geography, a nation, and/or a state. I think it important to distinguish between the nation or culture of America, and the particular state or government that currently claims dominion over its geographic boundaries. The America of old that you and I pine for, is the culture that respected individual rights and provided the opportunity to achieve prosperity through honest effort. We may have been somewhat motivated to “keep up with the Joneses”; but at least we worked hard at it, and would never have dreamed of employing the government to plunder their wealth, to redistribute it to us.

      That once great culture is history, Troy. It was indoctrinated out of our kids in public schools, and thus is now being completely bred out of our grandchildren. It will take a lot more than political activism, and/or voting for the lessor of evils, by those of us old enough to remember the halcyon days of America, to ever return to them. The very notion of reversing 100+ years of Progressivism by working within the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly, to repair the out-of-control Federal Leviathan, is a cruel joke. The sooner the revolution begins, the sooner our posterity can start over. It could not be otherwise. 🙁 ◄Dave►

      • Troy Robinson says:

        I understand your point; but I personally would not have used the term “privileged.” The usual connotation implies a revokable permission ‘granted’ by an ‘authority,’ which rubs my ever contumacious mind the wrong way.

        A “privilege” granted by an accident of birth. I could just as well have appeared in some 3rd world hellhole.

        By that lost America, I mean all aspects of it… the culture surely being the driving force.

        Troy

  • Chris says:

    Has this guy come up on anyone’s radar? I may be voting libertarian this trip around and I like him…..so far. http://tspeak.us/austin-petersen/

    • Troy Robinson says:

      He is not bad but I prefer Gov. Johnson because of his proven record on budget control.

      Troy

      • Chris says:

        I understand Troy. My suggestion regarding him comes purely from a position that he may be able at this time to form a bridge to a really large number of disenchanted republican conservatives. There is a door open for the libertarian party to get on the electoral map. He seems pragmatic about his libertarian purity when considering the actual landscape. Like he says. He has time. The Libertarian party may just need someone less “scary” than Ron Paul. Peterson is a pro-life atheist. That makes him pro-life for the right reasons. He’s actually had to think about the issue and form an opinion absent any additional dogma. That kind of thinking works for me. Only one example of why I hope he’s on the November ballot. If given the choice of the two they are offering I’ll be voting libertarian this year.

    • ◄Dave► says:

      No, I haven’t, Chris. Unfortunately, since I have vowed not to listen to Glenn Beck ever again, I’ll have to pass on the interview. From what you write, had I not evolved beyond libertarianism, I might be interested – especially if he has more enthusiasm and charisma than Gary Johnson, et al.

      I recently read an old 1997 article, which has given me a whole new perspective on the Libertarian Party:

      At the last Liberty Conference, an intellectual brawl erupted during a panel discussion on terrorism. Since I consider electoral politics the milquetoast equivalent of terrorism, my opening statement was a condemnation of voting. My arguments were aimed at libertarians who consider themselves anarchists yet jump to their feet in ebullient applause upon hearing that a fellow libertarian wants to be a politician. In the two raucous hours that ensued, a question was posed: “If you could have cast the deciding vote against Hitler, would you have done so?” I replied, “No, but I would have no moral objection to putting a bullet through his skull.” In essence, I adopted a stronger line – a “plumbline,” as Benjamin Tucker phrased it – on eliminating the Hitler threat.

      I consider such a bullet to be an act of self-defense in a manner that a ballot could never be. A bullet can be narrowly aimed at a deserving target; a ballot attacks innocent third parties who must endure the consequences of the politician I have assisted into a position of power over their lives. Whoever puts a man into a position of unjust power – that is, a position of political power – must share responsibility for every right he violates thereafter.

      I find her logic difficult to refute. If a libertarian avows the Non-aggression Principle, how could he ever vote to empower the state to aggress against individuals, to even collect taxes? There are plenty of ways to establish voluntary cooperation in society, without coercion. Any and all politicians, whatever their ideology, anxious to get their hands on the levers of coercive government, should be viewed with extreme skepticism. 😉 ◄Dave►

      • Chris says:

        I understand Dave. I haven’t engaged much on your probably not so recent enchantment with anarchy. It’s not that I don’t understand or even disagree with the idea. I just find it hard to entertain the impossible. I mock and scoff at the progressive “democratic socialist” idea of their utopia because it totally disregards the element of human nature. I would find myself in the same position if I were to engage in discussion of a completely stateless society or anarchy. By all means carry on. I may say little but I read everything you write.

        That said there is more out there on Petersen beside the Beck interview. If you are so inclined at some time check him out.

        • ◄Dave► says:

          Impossible? Hide and watch. The USA would already have disintegrated, were the government not able to continue to print worthless fiat currency, and pretend to borrow it to pay their bills. The moment that the world stops trusting and accepting FRNs as money, anarchy with respect to the Federal government will result. How long would you expect its minions, including all law enforcement and military personnel, to continue working after they cannot cash their worthless paychecks?

          I thought we had already agreed that this chaos was absolutely inevitable eventually, and the project at hand was to attempt to design an orderly future to replace it. You guys immediately began to suggest corrections to the Constitutional structure, in order to create a better nation-state. I, on the other hand, have been suggesting a stateless alternative, eliminating altogether rulers in a coercive police state. Either way, I would suggest, we would be moving forward from an extant condition of likely chaotic anarchy.

          Yes, there will always be those with human behavior issues; but why create a legal coercive structure to attract them? In many respects, the difference between the jackbooted thugs and the criminals, is just which team they joined. When acting in defense of themselves or innocents, I have no beef with either. When engaged in unprovoked offense, against each other or harmless innocents, I have no respect for either. I would have no difficulty in hiring either to defend me from aggression; but I could never in good conscious hire either to coerce others to bend to my will. In a stateless society, only defenders would be tolerated, never offenders. ◄Dave►

  • Troy Robinson says:

    In a stateless society, only defenders would be tolerated, never offenders.

    By whom and by what rules is a person judged to be intolerable? Who then acts to do whatever is done to in intolerable persons?

    Have you considered that what might look to you as an offensive act might be my way of defending myself?

    This begs the need for a set of rules (laws) that can be easily understood by all and a system for fairly administering said rules.

    Also, no matter the system (or lack of same), leaders will emerge simply because most people want to be led. This, in my mind, begs for some process for selecting leaders, else the law of the jungle will likely prevail.

    Indeed, with good leaders, almost any form of society can flourish. Without good leaders, all forms of society eventually fail.

    Any way you cut it, this becomes a sort of “state”. Even the most primitive tribal societies had rules (perhaps taboos) and chiefs. I fail to see an alternative and I honestly believe some form of “state” will emerge from all chaotic situations, simply because the sheeple and/or the “strong person” will demand it.

    Troy

    • ◄Dave► says:

      By whom and by what rules is a person judged to be intolerable? Who then acts to do whatever is done to in intolerable persons?

      I was speaking of using force. In a stateless society, anyone initiating force would not be tolerated. Defense and retribution could be effected by the victim himself, and/or his family, friends, or hired agents (private security). The cool thing, would be the absence of state authorities to protect perpetrators of violence from instant karma. The principle would be similar to the conditions I described in my ranching community 30 miles from the nearest police station.

      Have you considered that what might look to you as an offensive act might be my way of defending myself?

      Too bad… I wouldn’t much care what your motive was, if you aggressed against me, I would defend myself and/or retaliate. If your offense was egregious enough, I would rustle up a vigilante posse to eliminate your threat to my community.

      This begs the need for a set of rules (laws) that can be easily understood by all and a system for fairly administering said rules.

      I have no problem at all with local rules of the road and civil behavior, designed to insure everyone drives on the same side of the road, and eliminate aggressive behavior. I just would never choose to live in a place where meddlesome neighbors tried to enforce onerous restrictions on my chosen lifestyle. What I object to is the notion that because there is a nation-state, such rules must be uniform nationwide, regardless of local custom and preferences, and enforced with jackbooted thugs with guns.

      Also, no matter the system (or lack of same), leaders will emerge simply because most people want to be led. This, in my mind, begs for some process for selecting leaders, else the law of the jungle will likely prevail.

      Granting your premise that leaders will emerge because individualism has been bred out of the sheeple and they want to be led, so what? Without the sanction of a state permitting these leaders to initiate force against others, and providing them a Praetorian Guard at taxpayer expense to cover their abuses, they couldn’t have much effect on those not wishing to follow their lead. Frankly, I would prefer the law of the jungle, where just about every other species besides homo sapiens generally cooperates with their own kind, and rarely engage in mortal combat with each other, to that of a police state.

      Any way you cut it, this becomes a sort of “state”. Even the most primitive tribal societies had rules (perhaps taboos) and chiefs.

      I would strongly object to your characterization of a tribal society as a form of ‘state.’ Perhaps this is the disconnect we are experiencing when I try to sell you on the merits of a stateless society. Lack of a police state does not imply the lack of organized localized societies, with established rules, social compacts, and even leaders. Adults belonging to such societies, do so voluntarily. If the rules become too onerous to tolerate, people are free to move away to someplace more conducive to their preferred lifestyle. In fact, banishment has been the ultimate ‘punishment’ for uncivilized behavior by such societies, since time immemorial.

      However they are organized, and however their leaders are selected, they need not worry that a police state headquartered thousands of miles away, could change the rules they have agreed to live by on a whim, whether they like it or not. Try to imagine what it would take to convince a continent full of such independent tribal communities, who unlike us had never been brainwashed to think it necessary, that it would somehow be in their best interest to relinquish their sovereignty by joining such a nation state of rulers from afar. Afghanistan comes to mind… 😉 ◄Dave►

  • OH MY! … one is dragged away from the internet for a couple of weeks and look what one misses … LOL

    Damned everyday life just keeps chugging along with its everyday fires that must be put out …… OR????. Has anyone else been tempted to just let it burn?

    OH WAIT! … who would have to rebuild? … that would be me! … DRAT!! 😉

    Here kindred souls all facing what they see as the collapse of a world they once enjoyed/trusted/loved going to hell in a hand basket.

    What to do but simply let it happen?

    DAVE:>> Beats me, Troy. If we can’t motivate each other, how could we ever hope to motivate Thoreau’s hapless sheeple, leading lives of quiet desperation?

    Dave I am not sure the sheeple are in a “quiet desperate” shape. I doubt they see anything desperate about it … clearly not enough to whip them into survival mode yet.

    Without that they simply bitch, moan and groan.

    When the bomb blows in their own personal front door then MAYBE.

    TROY:>> most people want and need to be led. They have neither the desire or the talent to be leaders.

    That has also been my experience Troy.

    I have grown to believe there are just those who have the ability to lead and those who don’t no matter what they are given.

    Experience with my activist group was a good example … after 7 years of developing a fast acting well functioning organization I left it fully in the hands of my top 2 sidekicks (1 female – 1 male) within 3 months it was totally collapsed.

    Yes I believe organizations and governments can get too big to succeed.

    Not to mention I know of at least 5 very successful small business that went under after they were sold by the original owners.

    DAVE:>> As a technician, I could only respect those at least as competent at my job as I was, whatever their rank. Even then, I accepted them as my boss; but never looked up to them as a ‘leader.’ I am just not a follower, and I guess I can’t relate to those who are.

    I am ever amazed at how much we think alike Dave.
    To me RESPECT is the operative word. In my world RESPECT is there or it is not. If not those individuals simply do not fit into my life other than daily niceties.

    TROY:>> BTW, all my life I have been a natural leader but never relished the role. I did not like the feeling of being more responsible for others than they were for themselves.

    Troy apparently there is a test for this leadership thing. When I was 25 working for PTT they sent a bunch of us for a battery of tests. It was a week away from home all expenses paid so why not?

    Part of the test was quite long (written) … odd in my opinion back then … who cared if those 10 symbols were like other symbols etc. The other part was separating this now larger group (maybe 30) into smaller groups and giving them tasks to solve.

    When I returned to the home office within a month I was moved off my very comfy long line telephone operator job into the office of the top executive of that division as his intern.

    That did not sit well with my 250 peer fellow workers and certainly did not sit well with about 10 chief and assistant chief operators who had been in their jobs for infinity. Ringa Ding Ding!

    That test turned out to be something they called “abstract reasoning” and apparently it showed I had quite an “abstract mind” … it did answer for me why I seemed always to be odd woman out (or back then odd kid out). 🙂

    After about 6 months of watching the inner political workings of this executive who was grooming me for a job women (twice my age) had worked many years to gain … self said no no this is not where I choose to be. Made a request to return to my lowly job as a long line operator.

    Do you suppose those with a propensity to lead are better at it because it is not truly their hearts desire? … lol 😉

    Dave:>> Urban Varmints

    It is hard for this simple farmer to understand why city folk do not defend themselves against the violent brutes among them. Are the cities filled with cowards? We country folk still recognize our responsibility to defend ourselves. The nearest deputy is usually thirty miles away. I don’t expect the Sheriff’s Department to protect me; they couldn’t if they tried. Their job is to investigate and make a report after the smoke has cleared. It is exceedingly rare for them to catch a perpetrator in the act. Isn’t this true in the cities too? Does anyone really expect the cops to always be handy when urgently needed? Are they? What happens when they are not?

    Yes the city is filled with cowards. I always said if Watts had happened here in the valley where every hayseed had a shotgun in a rack and a bale of hay for cover … Watts RIOTS and its perpetrators would have lasted 5 minutes MAYBE.

    No the sheriff will not be there to protect you … I know!

    I was robbed at gun and knife point in my home. I had a 38 (not on me at that moment luckily) and a couple of deer rifles close by (locked and loaded). These 2 YOUNG black MEN (with a driver outside) caught me by surprise. I was fortunate because out of the rash of robberies they did during the holidays I was the only one not shot or stabbed that included 2 children.

    When I got free of the telephone cord they cut to tie me up (almost immediately) and called the police the first officer on the scene (a neighbor a block away (also black)… said “you saw a young black man on your porch and opened your door?”

    Who on earth thinks some black kid on your porch is there to rob you? I thought he was selling magazines … lol … so much for thinking back then.

    The moral of the story is unless you have the drop on someone your weapon is useless no matter how well you shoot. Now I have a sawed off loaded 12 gauge less than 3 feet from the front door. I don’t want to worry about shooting well I just want to shoot dead. I figure at 6 feet the intruder might land on the front lawn. Hopefully no need for paramedics.

    How we left the punishment phase into this bullcrap rehabilitation of today escapes me.

    I saw Stefan talking to some PHD on genetic criminals yesterday. If that is true then dispatching them on the scene would eventually stop the cycle it seems to me.

    So in my mind does the death penalty work?
    LOL in 2 ways … 1. the perpetrator is gone … 2. the next perpetrator might think twice before taking action.

    BTW I actually do remember a time when if caught looting one expected to be shot dead by authorities.

    Where the heck are the good old days? 🙂

    • ◄Dave► says:

      OH MY! … one is dragged away from the internet for a couple of weeks and look what one misses

      What was most missed here was you!

      I am ever amazed at how much we think alike Dave.

      Which is why you were missed. 😉

      BTW I actually do remember a time when if caught looting one expected to be shot dead by authorities.

      This is true. When I first became a peace officer back in ’66, we had a duty to shoot a fleeing felon in the back if necessary, rather than allow him to escape. Consequently, very few ever tried to flee. I still remember the first time a few years later in ’72, after the rules of engagement had changed, when I caught a burglar in the act, rifling through a bedroom dresser. I pointed a 357 magnum at him through the open window and said, “freeze!” Knowing I couldn’t shoot, he took one look at me and ran. The “good old days” have been long gone for over 40 years. 😉 ◄Dave►

      • Well Thank You Dave … it is nice to know I was missed. I miss being here too. It is actually nice to communicate with people who actually can think on their own.

        My normal chit chat is with some dull propagandized twit on youtube or Glenn Becks facebook page. Oh I must confess I like to rile up the numb-scull “black lives matter” dolts who do not have a clue what it was like to walk out their front door and find a neighbor hanging from the nearest willow tree.

        Yes what would be nice is to harken back to the good old days where a horse thief was hanged on the spot for stealing your horse. 😉

Leave a Reply

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Archives
Blogroll
Internal Links