There are two ways to live life:

A.) You're a victim, and/or unable to fully provide for yourself and so you you are to be provided for. If there is something you aren't getting or do not have access to, the government should be in charge of handling it so that you or others who think or feel like you get it.

or

B.) You don't want to be a victim, regardless of your background and circumstances and you want full control and agency over your life. You want to provide for yourself. You want the government only to maintain your liberties (protect your ability to provide for yourself), not do the providing for you.





Which way of living life sounds more fulfilling and better to you?

Claiming there are just two ways to live life is one of the falsest statements a person could make. Life is far too complex to be broken down into two extremely generic categories like this.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14901000]Claiming there are just two ways to live life is one of the falsest statements a person could make. Life is far too complex to be broken down into two extremely generic categories like this.[/QUOTE]
What? lol this is really easy to answer. Diametrically opposing ideas. There aren't an infinite amount of them... maybe an infinite amount of shades of grey in between? Just answer how you feel about it :oldlol:

At the most basic levels, yes.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14901000]Claiming there are just two ways to live life is one of the falsest statements a person could make. Life is far too complex to be broken down into two extremely generic categories like this.[/QUOTE]Obviously there are nuances but I think what op's trying to get at is that there people who can take care of themselves and people who can't. We can get into the nitty gritty and talk about generational wealth, how one person deserves it more over the other, etc or weighing the morality of it; but at the very basics of it it's really just people who can take care of themselves and people who can't.

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14900982]A.) You're a victim, and/or unable to fully provide for yourself and so you you are to be provided for. If there is something you aren't getting or do not have access to, the government should be in charge of handling it so that you or others who think or feel like you get it.

or

B.) You don't want to be a victim, regardless of your background and circumstances and you want full control and agency over your life. You want to provide for yourself. You want the government only to maintain your liberties (protect your ability to provide for yourself), not do the providing for you.





Which way of living life sounds more fulfilling and better to you?[/QUOTE]

It is about participation.

The victim stuff is only one piece of the rationalization. It is not entirely about blaming someone/something else for lack of opportunity. There is another side where you will find people who shelter themselves with stuff like[I] i could have done that... if i wanted to
[/I]

Dude unless you are an anarchist supporting a stateless society of voluntary transactions, you are just another entitled fool begging for the government to help you in some aspect of survival. You can act like you have limits, but the fact is you still need protection like a bitch.

[QUOTE=VICTIM;14901058]Dude unless you are an anarchist supporting a stateless society of voluntary transactions, you are just another entitled fool begging for the government to help you in some aspect of survival. You can act like you have limits, but the fact is you still need protection like a bitch.[/QUOTE]

Good talk

[QUOTE=Norcaliblunt;14901058]Dude unless you are an anarchist supporting a stateless society of voluntary transactions, you are just another entitled fool begging for the government to help you in some aspect of survival. You can act like you have limits, but the fact is you still need protection like a bitch.[/QUOTE]

As I said in the OP - liberties require protecting. There is no preserving people's liberties and rights without enforcement when those rights and liberties are infringed upon, externally and internally. I'm certainly not an anarchist. But I also don't believe in government hand outs and social programs. Those who don't know their history are destined to repeat it by the way, it isn't being a "bitch" requiring protection such as a military. There are entire governed nations with militaries in this world that want you dead for not believing what they believe in. You need a big stick to counter that. An organized one, not just individuals trying to defend themselves. That's a recipe for destruction and having no liberty at all in short time.

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14901064]As I said in the OP - liberties require protecting. There is no preserving people's liberties and rights without enforcement when those rights and liberties are infringed upon, externally and internally. I'm certainly not an anarchist. But I also don't believe in government hand outs and social programs. Those who don't know their history are destined to repeat it by the way, it isn't being a "bitch" requiring protection such as a military. There are entire governed nations with militaries in this world that want you dead for not believing what they believe in. You need a big stick to counter that. An organized one, not just individuals trying to defend themselves. That's a recipe for destruction and having no liberty at all in short time.[/QUOTE]

So you believe in stealing from people to fund programs to help protect yourself from being a victim? Lmao. Great logic.

[QUOTE=Norcaliblunt;14901078]So you believe in stealing from people to fund programs to help protect yourself from being a victim? Lmao. Great logic.[/QUOTE]what do you believe in? By stealing do you mean taxes? So how do we fund a central military to protect us from being savagely pillaged and forcefully converted to Islam?

[QUOTE=Norcaliblunt;14901078]So you believe in stealing from people to fund programs to help protect yourself from being a victim? Lmao. Great logic.[/QUOTE]

It is pretty great logic. I have the liberty to try and make an honest living without harming others or impeding their liberty to make an honest living so long as they aren't harming or impeding others etc, and I want protections for me and others around me so that things stay that way.

What the heck kind of society do you believe in? lol

[QUOTE=j3lademaster;14901080]what do you believe in? By stealing do you mean taxes? So how do we fund a central military to protect us from being savagely pillaged and forcefully converted to Islam?[/QUOTE]


Protect us? I thought you guys didn’t play the victim bullshit? Why do you need protection and government handouts if you aren’t a potential victim?

[QUOTE=Norcaliblunt;14901082]Protect us? I thought you guys didn’t play the victim bullshit? Why do you need protection and government handouts if you aren’t a potential victim?[/QUOTE]

Are you incapable of understanding the concept of wanting to earn your way in life in a meaningful and positive manner that doesn’t prevent others from having the same liberty and simply wanting that to be protected? What don’t you understand about it? You dislike it somehow if so then why?

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14901081]It is pretty great logic. I have the liberty to try and make an honest living without harming others or impeding their liberty to make an honest living so long as they aren't harming or impeding others etc, and I want protections for me and others around me so that things stay that way.

What the heck kind of society do you believe in? lol[/QUOTE]

It’s hypocritical logic. You’re afraid of being victimized by foreign militaries etc. so you feel entitled to state protection. Well some people feel threatened by other shit and lobby the state for protection there. This is how political discourse works. Lol.

It’s not some black and white bs scenario your op presented.

[QUOTE=Norcaliblunt;14901085]It’s hypocritical logic. You’re afraid of being victimized by foreign militaries etc. so you feel entitled to state protection. Well some people feel threatened by other shit and lobby the state for protection there. This is how political discourse works. Lol.

It’s not some black and white bs scenario your op presented.[/QUOTE]
There is no such thing as a liberty (or any society of any kind) without protection for those who want it or enforcement against those that wish to take it away... No you aren't poking holes in my presentation of two diametrically opposing ideologies. There's always room for discourse sure - so go ahead and dive into the discourse if you'd like. The black and white as you put it is just another analogy for left or right in this case.

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14901088]There is no such thing as a liberty (or any society of any kind) without protection for those who want it or enforcement against those that wish to take it away... No you aren't poking holes in my presentation of two diametrically opposing ideologies. There's always room for discourse sure - so go ahead and dive into the discourse if you'd like. The black and white as you put it is just another analogy for left or right in this case.[/QUOTE]



You can do the mental gymnastics all you want. The bottom line is you’re acting like just as much of a bitch ass victim if you are asking for mommy and daddy government to “protect your liberties” as you would be asking for anything else.

You’re literally so afraid of other humans attacking you that you support stealing money from other individuals to fund your own security. Lmao. This is the definition of not being able to hack it on your own, dependent on the state, and being a perpetual victim.

OP - my theory is based on

Winner -- supports his country thru thick and thin , and tries not to rip it off.

Loser - someone that pays 600 bucks for taxs' , and is a billionaire.

you CAN say 2 people dancing to themselves with completely different toxology report isn't considered r@pe.