DOJ Organized TM protests

[GandD 5,966]

i think its a magic world to think that people are incapable of policing themselves. at this point in the game, people are so used to being commanded (what is permissible and what is not, what form to file or fee to pay) in order to exist within the grid we've all but lost faith in our own capabilities.

i don't believe leadership is bad, however personal responsibility/accountibility should lead the individual. that is the primary goal of reaching an age of culpability. specifically relating to the wording of the question..there is a difference between a leader or manager or organizer and someone "to be obeyed", in my opinion.

and people do police themselves, everyday. we have police and written rules in order to enforce punishment or in the case of things like parking tickets or ccw permits to generate revenue for the state. if all the cops disappeared from my town for a day, i don't believe for an instant that we'd all lose our marbles and start rioting or killing everything in sight...

When I read that question, I'll admit I didn't like the wording. But there's a difference between obeying a supreme leader and a stop sign you know. i had to agree based on the premise of a societal structure of laws/law makers and bosses/workers. Elections somewhat help check power but we know they don't completely. I think leaders and followers have to exist and that the leaders should be a direct representation of the followers thoughts and beliefs. You know, like this country is supposed to work sans the corruption.

[decocker 7,198]

When I read that question, I'll admit I didn't like the wording. But there's a difference between obeying a supreme leader and a stop sign you know. i had to agree based on the premise of a societal structure of laws/law makers and bosses/workers. Elections somewhat help check power but we know they don't completely. I think leaders and followers have to exist and that the leaders should be a direct representation of the followers thoughts and beliefs. You know, like this country is supposed to work sans the corruption.

simpler version of my initial ramble: the word leader doesn't bother me; obey/command used with the term leader bothers me.

[Teddy B 17,252]

i think its a magic world to think that people are incapable of policing themselves. at this point in the game, people are so used to being commanded (what is permissible and what is not, what form to file or fee to pay) in order to exist within the grid we've all but lost faith in our own capabilities.

i don't believe leadership is bad, however personal responsibility/accountibility should lead the individual. that is the primary goal of reaching an age of culpability. specifically relating to the wording of the question..there is a difference between a leader or manager or organizer and someone "to be obeyed", in my opinion.

and people do police themselves, everyday. we have police and written rules in order to enforce punishment or in the case of things like parking tickets or ccw permits to generate revenue for the state. if all the cops disappeared from my town for a day, i don't believe for an instant that we'd all lose our marbles and start rioting or killing everything in sight...

Spot on with this Val. I agree with everything you said, and that's why I disagreed with the question too.

[GandD 5,966]

simpler version of my initial ramble: the word leader doesn't bother me; obey/command used with the term leader bothers me.

I did read/understand your response. That's why i said this first "When I read that question, I'll admit I didn't like the wording. "

[decocker 7,198]

I did read/understand your response. That's why i said this first "When I read that question, I'll admit I didn't like the wording. "

did your answer reflect the wording that was used or wording you felt more comfortable with in line with your answer..?

[GandD 5,966]

did your answer reflect the wording that was used or wording you felt more comfortable with in line with your answer..?

I might have done some mental gymnastics. I felt like the question was misleading. I interpreted it as a d1ck way to ask if i was for leaders and followers as a societal structure. I agreed based on my interpretation. I assumed disagreeing meant I would be pro-anarchy.

[decocker 7,198]

I might have done some mental gymnastics. I felt like the question was misleading. I interpreted it as a d1ck way to ask if i was for leaders and followers as a societal structure. I agreed based on my interpretation. I assumed disagreeing meant I would be pro-anarchy.

well i .. uh. guess you have a negative view of anarchism as a political philosphy..