Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 00:44:14 +0200 (CEST)
From: Joacim Persson <joacim-AT-ymex.net>
Subject: Re: UK uproar?


On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Kristopher Barrett wrote:

> Incorrect. The law may say no, but since the police have 100% discretion
> here, what the police decide is what happens. The police won't issue the
> permit unless you own land, or are a club member. What the law actually
> says doesn't really matter.

I see. Fact doesn't matter. (You are not presenting any. An ever so
entertaining conspiracy theory is still only fiction. ;)

Of course, if you're not planning to go hunting, you have no use for
hunting tools, regardless if there is a state interfering or not. You
wouldn't notice there was a state unless it interfere with your life.

If you plan to take up armed "class struggle", an assault gun would perhaps
be more suitable? (Which they won't give you a licence for anyway) In such
cases, I would disadvice from using licenced weapons though, to avoid being
traced. (shotguns can be traced too)



> Why should someone who can afford a plot of ground have civil rights that
> are greater than someone living out of a shopping cart? As long as one
> group has privileges granted due to influence with the state... then
> class still exists.

Industrial "workers" in the cities in labour/social-democratic states has
priviliges and influence with the state representing /them/ and noone else;
that's how politicians buy votes. That discludes both the petty farmer and
the trash proletarian living out of a shopping cart. Those two can shake
hands.



[Just mention the word "altruism" and some people start to foam.]

> And here we go.... outright Randism.

Nope

> 
> Altruism is NOT EVIL.

Thank you.  Not that anyone said it was. (Except perhaps randites, but
they're not here.) Good people can be screwed by evil people. Happens every
day. Deal with it. (Randites don't. They shoot their heads off to cure a
headache, so to speak.)


> Propaganda being ideas you disagree with?

Propaganda is the art of gaining supporters for an idea without attempting
to convince.

(As terrorism is the art of neutralising opponents, also without
convincing.)

Pseudo-arguments (ad hominem, petitio principii etc etc) are not aiming at
convincing.

Dave has already produced almost all variants of false arguments, to the
point of giving the impression of not being by mistake or ignorance, but
deliberately. Now he is busy adding amusing little insults to every post he
makes about completely different matters.

That is what just about all politics is nowadays, it seems. Propaganda.
People support this or that idea, or this or that party, in the same manner
they support this or that football team. Ideas are merely "products" to be
"marketed", and politicians are kareoke-artists who don't even understand
their own words or acts themselves.

A year ago, I had exactly this debate with someone off-net, but then it was
"globalisation" demonstrators in Gothenburg, not peasants (or "landed
gentry") in London. Regardless of what motives they have, or even methods
they use, one cannot simply ignore tens of thousands, or as now in London,
hundreds of thousands people being pissed off over something, as a
political or social force. Something is happening, and doing the oestrich
("they're just confused" or "they are only greedy") is no analysis of what
is happening. If it is ignored it may escalate, possibly into something
ugly.

It do strikes me though, that what is happening globally (3rd world being
eaten by the 1st) is also happening regionally and within nations.

I-world as well as 3rd world peasants et al are being screwed to assure
food (raw material) of a sufficient quality and price (and jobs) to the
voting cattle in town, who in turn also are being screwed.



> Perhaps you might try thinking
> critically about the things we are talking about, rather than dismissing
> them as "propaganda".

How critical do you want me to be? I'm doing the best I can already.