Only through the thin film of your usual tactics of creating strawmen and disrupting thread after thread with the same antagonistic foolishness.
I haven't erected any strawmen, I've taken his claims at face value and drawn out their implications. He is claiming that pre-modern states were not in fact states. That's not a strawman, that's precisely what he's saying at face value.
Please stop trolling BP. It is getting tiresome when people insist upon sidetracking every discussion, without contributing anything except strawmen and semantic arguments.
I never troll. In order for me to be trolling, I'd (1) have to actually not believe what I'm saying and (2) have to be deliberately digging for an emotional response. None of that is true, I'm being completely genuine.
You may view it as side-tracking discussion, but it seems to me that you'd call anything that isn't absolute agreement side-tracking the discussion and trolling. Sorry, things don't work that way in real disucssions.
In fact, if anyone is sidetracking the discussion it is you, since I was previously making intellectual arguments about the topic and you turned it into a personalized matter. And the original poster is simply stone-walling discussion rather than sidetracking.
Juan: DBratton:That statement was was wrong when L14 made it though. Take it up with Louis XIV ? What is wrong actually is the ridiculous notion that so called royal governments are not states.
DBratton:That statement was was wrong when L14 made it though.
Waiting to hear your argument.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Stranger: Think of the ECB. In this case, the bank's orders are to contain inflation, and the pleas of individual governments to expand credit are ignored. Bureaucratic function is something of a protection. Suppose the EU were to create a "security intervention force", a permanent military force capable of intervening in border conflicts. There would be no clear civilian command for this military force, and it would be required to intervene as per its rules of operations without the member governments being able to influence it. It could then fight wars without any form of restraint or conscientiousness simply by claiming that it is following orders, and possibly even overthrow governments in the process.
Think of the ECB. In this case, the bank's orders are to contain inflation, and the pleas of individual governments to expand credit are ignored. Bureaucratic function is something of a protection.
Suppose the EU were to create a "security intervention force", a permanent military force capable of intervening in border conflicts. There would be no clear civilian command for this military force, and it would be required to intervene as per its rules of operations without the member governments being able to influence it. It could then fight wars without any form of restraint or conscientiousness simply by claiming that it is following orders, and possibly even overthrow governments in the process.
If I am understanding this correctly, you're saying that a state can exist without a head, and likewise a head can exist without a state. Seems reasonable to me.
But with no civilian command, how would such a bureaucracy fund itself?
liberty student: But with no civilian command, how would such a bureaucracy fund itself?
From the taxes it was granted.
Could it raise taxes or create new ones through another branch of the bureaucracy?
Sorry if these questions seem to simple. First, I am trying to better understand this, and second I figured we should just talk past the trolls and salvage this discussion for something fruitful (like my increased knowledge)
liberty student: Could it raise taxes or create new ones through another branch of the bureaucracy?
That really depends on what kinds of powers it has been delegated by the governments. Normally the taxes are raised by governments, but in the case of the ECB, for example, it has full discretion to set target interest rates.
Ok, thx. Isn't that basically the globalists plan? To have a multi-lateral technocracy that answers to no state or collection of states, and pursues it's own agenda?
Sorta like Earth Corp. or Starfleet?
liberty student: Ok, thx. Isn't that basically the globalists plan? To have a multi-lateral technocracy that answers to no state or collection of states, and pursues it's own agenda? Sorta like Earth Corp. or Starfleet?
I don't know what those things are.
Earth Corp was just something I made up. Like a global corporation.
And Starfleet, well if you have ever watched Star Trek.... But seriously, Starfleet is an example of a global/universal defense and scientific organization that is not nation or race specific.
In political science, a "nation" refers to a group of people who feel bound into a single body by shared culture, values, folkways, religion and/or language. A "state" just refers to a patch of land with a sovereign government. States often coincide with nations (and are called "nation-states," but not always. States that overlap multiple nations tend to have civil wars; states that exclude parts of a nation tend to have wars with the neighboring state(s) that contain the rest of the nation.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_state_and_nation
What is the difference between State and Government:
__A government (from the Greek Κυβερνήτης kubernites - steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder) is an organization that has the power to make and enforce laws for a certain territory. There are several definitions on what exactly constitutes a government. In its broadest sense, "govern" means the power to administrate, whether over an area of land, a set group of people, or an association. __A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood, although some theories do not make this a requirement - for instance, the Montevideo Convention. ...
A movie about the crowning-campaign on May 1st in Lörrach concerning the topic 'basic income'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_oh6uyKC2M
Anatomy of the State by Murray N. Rothbard - anyone?
This.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Forgot about this thread.
Good find!
Peace
You're welcome!