Swastikas and Germany in the modern day...

[Skybird]

I have turned into a zero state or zero government guy, as should have become clear over the past months and years. The criticism against both feudal and democratic state orders, is too fundamental and too destructive as if I could make compromises with it anymore. Note that Hoppe too condemns both feudalism and democracies. even worse, I think the likelihood of demicracy bringing bad perosnnel into controlling power is greater than the cfhance in a monarchy. Due to the implicaitons of the election mechnsim, you have extremely high chances, that the worst of the worst, the lowest charcters, the greatest cheaters liars, the most unscrupulous liars, the most immoral egoists come to power. And qualification is no argument in all this anyway. A monachy, on the other hand, "owns" land and people, and thus has an interest in keeping its property in good shape and manage it wisely. At lerast it shoudl have, and if that is the case, muzch more effort is donbe to make sure the next ruling generation indeed is sufficiently qualified. Of course, the monarchic system however gets haunted by corrupted gangsters, too, and history is filled with monarchs having caused havov on their nations and people. I would only argue that the chance to occasionally get a good administrator at the top is greater in a monarchic syste, than in a democracy, especially in the degenrated culture we have today the chance that political elections will give us responsible leaders, is zero. Because those telling the grim truths do not get elected, and do not get supported by established parties and lobbies, and voters prefer to vote for those making them better promises. It's all about voter bribery, as I have often said now, and by that making every voter a complice in crime who therefore has no right to complain, to criticise, to resist. In other words: it all is about preserving power and control for the elite at the top, and delaying the judgement day when our collapsing system will have no more space to evade. The power m onopoly and the monopoly of orinting money are the two most important tools for that. And if you think you can change that by going to the next elections and vote for the other guy, then I really cannot help you. I don't say it is naive, but I silently think it is.

I do not trust politicians and states, nor symbols or paroles, and my state of alertness is the higher the greater the group is by which it is triggered. Crowds of people are nothing but herds of cattle, easy to be led around. Also, to me, human intelligence and its resulting behavior and decision-making, and group size, are inversely proportional. By my life experience so far, I have no reason to step away from that assessment.

On quotes, for an academic paper you of course have different standards for source validation, than in private, and when the same quotes get printed in several different books, in several languages, and on the web get quoted up and down anyway, it becomes difficult to not realise what may or may not be historically original. In the end, while it might be correct to attribute a quote to "Anonymous" or somebody else, or like you did: giving a totally different quote replacing the first, which is different in wording and syntax, even in length and number of sentences, in the end it is the content that counts as long as the theme debated is not the historical figure assumed to be behind the quote, a person that then may appear in a different light

Such disputes about to whom a given quote is to be attributed, also are not new, nor are they rare.

[Skybird]

BTW, I disagree with the quote'S prediction as you give it. Where it says

"with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."

I would say differently:

"with the result freedom and wealth get eroded because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always be followed by growing sanctions by the government against the citizens, enforcing growing expropriation, devaluation of currency, growing totalitarianism to keep in control, and a socialist basic order and mass impoverishment as the final result."

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I have turned into a zero state or zero government guy, as should have become clear over the past months and years...

I do not trust politicians and states, nor symbols or paroles, and my state of alertness is the higher the greater the group is by which it is triggered. Crowds of people are nothing but herds of cattle, easy to be led around. Also, to me, human intelligence and its resulting behavior and decision-making, and group size, are inversely proportional. By my life experience so far, I have no reason to step away from that assessment.

I understand that, and even your reasoning. I have myself said that I believe no government is the best government, and the best government is no government. Of course that's also impossible, as people will always want to form a government in order to pass laws to protect themselves from each other.

On quotes...it becomes difficult to not realise what may or may not be historically original.

Quite true. I use unproven quotes in my sig all the time. On the other hand I did qualify my statement with "if you're going to use the quote to support an argument", and I stand by that. You used first "one of the early US presidents" and then Jefferson and Franklin, seemingly for the purpose of showing that our Founding Fathers agree with you. The fact that they didn't say that undercuts you argument. Perhaps in this case "Anonymous" might have been better.

[Skybird]

I saw no reason to use "Anonymous" when I see it linked to one and the same name all the time, in books and on webpages - and many of them. The term "the founding fathers" I only use because I notoriously forget what quote is attributed to whom, and there are so many quotes - artificial ones or original ones - that are worth to be known, so when I give such a quote from early presidents or founding fathers I often just say it is by "one of those boys from that gang". Understand it as pragmatism, please, no foul intention there.

I assume that such quotes got "modernised" in an act of creative freedom by somebody. In case of the Frnaklin quote, that is obvious, your version is much longer and sounds old-fashioned than n the version I gave. The Jefferson quote is quite popular and I have it in two other books as well, I also found it in the past in two German blogs , also in quote collection websites. I assume there is something that was said by the man that also served as an original on which this "modernised" quote is basing on. My knowedge on Jefferson is in no way complete, but the summarised biography I have read gives me the impression of a man who nevertheless could very well have said it the way it usually gets quoted.

Anyhow, lets move on.

[Sailor Steve]

I assume the quotes, like many, were not said by the people they are attributed to, but falsely claimed by someone somewhere to give weight to an argument, and then embraced by everybody who liked the quotes and wanted to believe them. I say nothing about Jimbuna's many Churchill "quotes" in the Favorite Quotes thread, but you can bet that if he used one of them to prove a point I'd be all over him too.

Meanwhile, I apologize for diverting from your original point, which is the failure of Democracy. I disagree with you, but it's a good point of discussion.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I assume the quotes, like many, were not said by the people they are attributed to, but falsely claimed by someone somewhere to give weight to an argument, and then embraced by everybody who liked the quotes and wanted to believe them. I say nothing about Jimbuna's many Churchill "quotes" in the Favorite Quotes thread, but you can bet that if he used one of them to prove a point I'd be all over him too.

Meanwhile, I apologize for diverting from your original point, which is the failure of Democracy. I disagree with you, but it's a good point of discussion.

Oi! Keep me out of this bun fight, I much prefer pies

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Meanwhile, I apologize for diverting from your original point, which is the failure of Democracy.

No need to, really.

[Betonov]

Democracy has just one fault.
Voters prefer bling to brain.
Garmin M.K. Betonov



In a thread this long, of course I'll interfere

[Penguin]

Getting back to the original question:

Germans think the sight of a Swastika will cause a stiff right arm - just as Americans think the sight of a nipple will make their kids turn blind.
Penguin von Wiseguy