[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;)
J Henshaw
jeff at jhenshaw.com
Tue Jun 18 10:36:14 UTC 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeme A Brelin" <jeme at brelin.net>
To: "PLUG off-topic discussion" <plug-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;)
>
> Against my better judgment, I'm going to reply here.
>
> Mr. Henshaw attributed a whole pile of beliefs to me. Few, if any, are
> actually mine. Some are inferences he's made based on snippets of other
> conversations. Some are misunderstandings that he's taken to be truths.
>
> I'm going to take a moment to respond to a few of them, but I should write
> first that it's always a mistake to try to state someone else's position
> for them.
>
> (I'm gonna skip this whole nonsense about gold being more sensible to
> trade for food than ink and paper. They're both just something someone
> else values that has no value to me.)
You misdirect. The point is "Just weights and Measures" whose value isn't
privately controlled, and which do not devalue quietly while you sleep,
and the minor inconvenience of the many
Laws it thumbs it's nose at.
But you still don't get it.
Let's say the ink and paper or "virtual" money you love evaporates like
steam rather than try to
show you how inflation is the enemy in real terms.
Wouldn't you feel cheated? If all your money under the mattress evaporated
over time?
Or the food in your freezer vanished at midnight like Cinderella?
>
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, J Henshaw wrote:
> > I have tried to reason with that one, many a time before you
> > apparently were listening, and he is not here to add to the discussion
> > but only to spread disorder and lies, misdirection and sleight of
> > hand.
>
> I leave it to all of the others here to determine whether my words are
> "lies, misdirection and sleight of hand."
Not all but the key ones.
>
> > He is ignorant of his own foolishness or he is a tool of evil, but
> > either way he has a goal that is contrary to the Law of this land
> > which makes him an enemy alien.
>
> Oh, I have plenty of goals contrary to the laws of this land. You can
> count on that.
That makes you a criminal.
>
> And since the laws of this land require the accomodation of residents who
> do not speak or read english, I think you have goals contrary to the laws
> of this land, too.
>
> Are you an enemy alien?
a Resident is a legal term for the legal fiction called a "legal
personality" in these Equity courts.
Just as an employee is a person who presents a social security card, which
has a name on it in all caps; that name is a "legal personality" such as
like a corporation is a "legal fiction" which in any other terms means a
lie.
If I could get you to reason you would become interested in what I say here;
because not all laws apply in all places, there is a venue indicated
immediately when the term resident is used.
It is a 14th amendment term.
The Federal Government can pass any damn law it wants, and if it is
unconstitutional it does not apply to me.
It may still apply in the 12 square miles of Washington D.C. and Guam,
Puerto Rico, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, State lands which have
been deeded to the US Corporation too, but not PDX Intl airport.
PDX is not ceded land as far as I know.
These concepts of jurisdiction are very important.
I think you can connect a dot here.
>
> > He does not respect our Justice system based upon reaping what YOU
> > sow, building houses and living in your own house, and private
> > property rights beginning with the right to wear shoes.
>
> I think very few people would agree that isolationism and selfishness are
> parts of the Justice system.
This is an example of misdirection. Not even worth answering.
>
> > ( I am serious, yes, he has claimed he has a right to the clothes in
> > my dresser and shoes in my closet which I have sown to wear on my feet
> > while I plow the fields )
>
> Actually, that was a misunderstanding on your part that you've taken to be
> fact.
>
> I was arguing from a theoretical perspective, sharing the arguments behind
> a particular doctrine that advocates the abolition of private property as
> a whole. I specifically stated several times that I did not necessarily
> subscribe to that doctrine.
"Not necessarily" subscribe to that doctrine. How firmly convicted you are.
When are you going to come out of the closet entirely.
>
> > He thinks someone else has a claim to not only your house, but it's
> > entire contents and all your your harvest.
> >
> > Who else is more deserving than me, to eat the wheat I sowed for my
> > children?
>
> This has nothing to do with me or anything else that's been discussed, but
> I'd just like to write that I'm really sick and tired of these false
> appeals to a non-existent agrarian ideal when arguing for individualism
> and self-reliance. The pre-capitalist, pre-industrial world whence all
> the agrarian metaphors come was far more cooperative than competitive;
> more collectivist than individualist.
Again irrelevant
>
> > Whether or not that someone else is a criminal illegal alien or a man
> > who does not share the same worldview, he thinks that he has a right
> > to tell me that a Great Plan for "A meal for every table" shall be
> > forced upon me if he has his way, by mere virtue of majority, whether
> > or not the majority is jumping off a cliff so to speak in their
> > foolish misguided attempt to achieve a nirvana world where no one goes
> > hungry and the grass is always gree; And he does not have an answer
> > for where my beliefs can peacefully coexist with his antithetical one.
>
> This part's just plain false. I didn't say that, I didn't write it, I
> don't believe it, and I didn't even argue the principle behind it.
I asked you directly once in the past, saying I don't like your plan and you
will need to kill me before I will allow it; and offered that as proof that
your plan rquires murder to implement because there are many more like me.
You did not answer how your plan is not flawed by this paradox.
>
> I think it should be evident to all who read my writing that I am no fan
> of the "Great Plan" of any sort. I believe certain modes of conduct
> (including peace, love, and understanding) should be encouraged and
> developed by all people in all other people, but I don't believe in
> coercion or destruction. The ends never justify the means. Life is all
> means. If we do it right, there is no end.
>
> However, it is true that I wrote that I didn't have any hard solution for
> how the folks who totally oppose property could coexist with those who
> believe in amassing personal wealth at the expense of others. I'd be
> interested to hear all suggestions, however.
>
> > The main difference between him and me is that my plan allows him to
> > be an ignorant fool ( but does not require me to provide him his
> > sustanence while he's at it.)
>
> The main difference between him and me is that he's an incoherent crank
> and I'm a coherent one.
And no one will take you to task for you ad hominem, only the one who makes
sense is attacked.
>
> But seriously, I don't have a plan.
>
> But, to turn the tables a bit, Mr. Henshaw has one and it requires every
> person to participate and it does not allow any person to survive without
> allowing one's labor to be exploited until wealth can be accrued to
> exploit the labor of others or run away to a hermitage -- neither of which
> is really sustainable.
You just tried to explain my position at the risk you describe at the top.
You did a poor job, because you can't see straight.
About how long do you think unbridled illegal immigration is "sustainable"
on an island.
>
> > Is might makes right just? Tyranny of the majority just? History, if
> > not reason and common sense, shows it is not, yet he clings. What can
> > I do but call him a fool?
>
> You can be tolerant, respectful, and kind, sir. But failing that, you can
> sling shit and call names.
>
> J.
I can call a fool a fool when he is a fool, and it is not an ad hominem
when done while describing you. It is merely accurate.
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list