Re: Workers Paradise. /Political rant.

At 11:43 PM 9/15/96, attila wrote:

>            NO, it does not need to be or do either, BUT, it means
>            that everybody independently attempts to succeed and the
>            'community' takes care of itself --and in the standard
>            sense, the ne'er do wells fall off the path of *their own
>            free choice.*  There will always be sickness and calamity,
>            but that is what the community is for.
>
>            BTW, it still works today; I live in one of 'em.

And lest there be any doubt, I _do_ support certain kinds of charities, and
will not of course stop anyone from practicing charity. While I have no
religious beliefs to speak of, I strongly support the mechanisms some
churches have for taking care of their own members, recruits from the
street, etc. (Including Salvation Army and "mission" sorts of inner city
things--note of course that most such entities also insist on prayer and/or
Bible readings as part of the deal...I wonder how long it will be before a
class action lawsuit is filed to stop the prayer part? This would
effectively shut the missions down, of course.)

The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights." A parish priest, for
example, might extend charity to a poor person, or a widow, or whatever,
but not to an able-bodied person who simply decided to not work. Nor to an
unmarried woman who kept getting pregnant and having more mouths to feed.

(I surmise that most such women either died of diseases related to sexual
promiscuity, died in childbirth, died of disease brought on by
malnutrition, or ended up in convents (Catholic birth control).)

The point is that even in an "age of charity," strings have to be attached
by the givers of charity. People will simply not give 40-60% of what they
earn to support a growing population of people who say it's their "right"
to welfare, AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), WIC (Women,
Infants, and Children), food stamps (*), and suchlike.

(At certain supermarkets I sometimes shop in on the way back to my town,
people in front of me in line put their nice cuts of meat down, their fine
loaves of bread, their frozen dinner entrees, their "Ben and Jerry's Ice
Cream," and then pay for it with books of blue "Department of Agriculture"
food stamps. They use their own cash (perhaps gotten by cashing their
welfare and "disability" checks) to buy their smokes and booze, as food
stamps are not allowed to be spent on this stuff. My impression is that
they eat more expensive food than I do, perhaps because they're buying the
food with "play money," whereas I'm buying my food with money that's what's
left after I had to pay 40-50 taxes, so I seek to economize when I can!)

>            Now, I don't intend to be Scrooge, but I'll fight for my
>            rights to cut off at the knees the knee-jerk liberals and
>            government slavemeisters who want to tell me that I, and
>            2 others are required to support 100 freeloaders.

And speaking of Scrooge, I like "A Christmas Carol" about as much as anyone
I know, and try to take the lesson of what Scrooge learned as a general
lesson about life and living it.

(As with "Robin Hood," the message is often confused. Robin Hood was not
"stealing from the rich," he was taking back what was stolen from the
peasants and farmers by the King and his tax collectors, notably the
Sheriff of Notingham. At least this is how I read the myth.)

--Tim May

We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Tim May wrote:

> The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
> was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
> masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."

   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
that you whine more.

In <199609160537.HAA26159@basement.replay.com>, on 09/16/96 
   at 07:37 AM, nobody@replay.com (Anonymous) said:

= .Tim May wrote:

= .> The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
= .> was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
= .> masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."

= .   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
= .their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
= .that you whine more.

        that is worse than a cheap shot...  like a man low enough to 
    shoot another while he's taking a crap.

        I'm not whining about it my rights any more than Tim is 
    whining about his.  One of the principals of the American 
    Revolution was NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. When our     
    government takes my money and creates a new class which "votes"
    to require me to pay for them; they are a vested interest voting
    only for their own gain without my consent.

        human rights are supposedly universal.  however, since when 
    has an entitlement been considered a "human right?"

        are you playing the part of the bleeding knee-jerk welfare 
    advocate?  The type: "I'm willing to give mine, (but I cheat on 
    my taxes) --just make sure you let the Feds extort their welfare 
    system from _your_ profits.

        The welfare system is not only broken and bankrupt, it is a 
    SELF EATING WATERMELON.

        charity is man's _benevolence_  and, there is nothing in the
    scriptures which says the lazy and resentful are _entitled_ to
    my support.  

        I tithe, and tithe faithfully; and contribute a fast offering 
    every month for the ward bishop's fund.  as in says in the 
    scriptures, he who faithfully tithes shall receive it tenfold.
    we take care of our own community, and we don't collect welfare.

        it works.

        and for the paid hypocritics who pass the basket every Sunday
    and scream about the poor --they dont give, they want you to give.

            --attila

attila:

> = .   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
> = .their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
> = .that you whine more.

   [silly remarks about crapping, watermelons, and hypocrites deleted]

>         I'm not whining about it my rights any more than Tim is 
>     whining about his.  One of the principals of the American 
>     Revolution was NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. When our     
>     government takes my money and creates a new class which "votes"
>     to require me to pay for them; they are a vested interest voting
>     only for their own gain without my consent.

   My full remarks are above; I never defended the present system.

>         human rights are supposedly universal.  however, since when 
>     has an entitlement been considered a "human right?"

   Never, AFAIK.

>         are you playing the part of the bleeding knee-jerk welfare 
>     advocate?  The type: "I'm willing to give mine, (but I cheat on 
>     my taxes) --just make sure you let the Feds extort their welfare 
>     system from _your_ profits.

   No.

>         charity is man's _benevolence_  and, there is nothing in the
>     scriptures which says the lazy and resentful are _entitled_ to
>     my support.  

   Charity has many definitions; in the Judeo-Christian tradition,
benevolence is not a prominent one. Nor are sawed off accusations of
laziness and resentfulness very indicative of caritas, OTOH.

>         I tithe, and tithe faithfully; and contribute a fast offering 
>     every month for the ward bishop's fund.  as in says in the 
>     scriptures, he who faithfully tithes shall receive it tenfold.
>     we take care of our own community, and we don't collect welfare.
> 
>         it works.

   That is an excellent thing, and you should do it regardless of returns;
we all should. I do.

attila wrote:

> = .   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
> = .their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
> = .that you whine more.
> 
>         that is worse than a cheap shot...  like a man low enough to 
>     shoot another while he's taking a crap.

   Initially this struck me as an inane analogy, so I snipped it (with
mention) from my response; in retrospect I see just how shrewdly you
captured the scene. Pure poetry. I *was* aiming at a guy who was shitting.
;)

On Mon, 16 Sep 1996, Anonymous wrote:

> Tim May wrote:
> 
> > The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
> > was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
> > masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."
> 
>    There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
> their rights

Such as the "right" to health insurance, the "right" to free checks for
sitting on one's chair, the "right" to be treated preferentially as
equally qualified non-minorities applying to the same job, the "right" to
housing, the "right" to free education, the "right" to be paid three times
what your labor is worth in the lowest bracket jobs.

> and your resentful whining about your rights

The right to personal property.

Beginning to get the picture?

All of the former were created in the last 60 years out of whole cloth
more as "revolution insurance" than anything else.  They are rights
because someone said they were, not because they are well or logically
grounded.

> - except maybe that you whine more.

I should hope he does.

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn@schloss.li

Black Unicorn wrote:

> > > The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
> > > was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the 
> > > resentful masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."
> > 
> >    There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
> > their rights
> 
> Such as the "right" to health insurance, the "right" to free checks for
> sitting on one's chair, the "right" to be treated preferentially as
> equally qualified non-minorities applying to the same job, the "right" to
> housing, the "right" to free education, the "right" to be paid three times
> what your labor is worth in the lowest bracket jobs.

   I wasn't surprised when Attilla flogged a cartoon liberal in responding
to me, but I'm quite surprised you have. I didn't produce or defend a
litany of "rights," I pointed out that Tim is resentful and whines.

> > and your resentful whining about your rights
> 
> The right to personal property.

   Malapropos.

> Beginning to get the picture?

   I've had it all along.

> All of the former were created in the last 60 years out of whole cloth
> more as "revolution insurance" than anything else.  They are rights
> because someone said they were, not because they are well or logically
> grounded.

   Absolutely.

> > - except maybe that you whine more.
> 
> I should hope he does.

   Why?

In <ae61f6ec05021004f2e5@[207.167.93.63]>, on 09/15/96 
   at 11:17 AM, tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) said:

= .At 11:43 PM 9/15/96, attila wrote:

= .>            NO, it does not need to be or do either, BUT, it means
= .>            that everybody independently attempts to succeed and
= .>            the 'community' takes care of itself --and in the
= .>            standardsense, the ne'er do wells fall off the path
= .>            of *their own free choice.*  There will always be
= .>            sickness and calamity, but that is what the community
= .>            is for.
= .>
= .>            BTW, it still works today; I live in one of 'em.

= .And lest there be any doubt, I _do_ support certain kinds of
= .charities, and will not of course stop anyone from practicing
= .charity. While I have no religious beliefs to speak of, 

        OK, Tim, we're patient...  we do not convert, we accept
    among the Saints only those who have received their own
    testimony.

        each must be free to pray as they believe.

= .I strongly
= .support the mechanisms some churches have for taking care of their
= .own members, recruits from the street, etc. 

        our members are our community. we believe in
    self-determination and that each must achieve is own greatness.
    we also believe in the support of the community, one and all. we
    do not file for government welfare.

= .(Including Salvation
= .Army and "mission" sorts of inner city things--note of course that
= .most such entities also insist on prayer and/or Bible readings as
= .part of the deal...

        well, we pray before our meals; we just ask that you respect
    our preference to pray.  we do not ask you to listen; if you
    listen, that is for your benefit; 

        The Salvation Army does make the men/women suffer through a
    short lesson and prayer.  maybe just one will listen one day;
    that is their reward.  The Salvation Army is just that: a
    dedicated army for the fallen.  Their "commanders" live in the
    same general quarters.

= .I wonder how long it will be before a class
= .action lawsuit is filed to stop the prayer part? This would
= .effectively shut the missions down, of course.)

        I doubt it would shut the Salvation Army down; that is a
    life long commitment and saving souls may be a mission, but not
    the raison d'etre of their existence.  

        The rest of them, I suspect the loss of 'mission' might be a
    death knell.

= .The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or
= .community sort, was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as
= .something the resentful masses could "demand" as part of their
= ."human rights." 

        THAT is the difference.  not until FDR was there an
    entitlement.
 
= .A parish priest, for example, might extend charity
= .to a poor person, or a widow, or whatever, but not to an
= .able-bodied person who simply decided to not work. 
= .
        that was the 'poor box' at the front of the sanctuary; the
    stories of the widow's mite (that and the teachings of Christ
    receiving the widow's mite).

= .Nor to an
= .unmarried woman who kept getting pregnant and having more mouths to
= .feed.

        well, stoning has not gone out of vogue in the muslim
    countries.
 
= .(I surmise that most such women either died of diseases related to
= .sexual promiscuity, died in childbirth, died of disease brought on
= .by malnutrition, or ended up in convents (Catholic birth control).)

        slave labour comes to mind...

= .The point is that even in an "age of charity," strings have to be
= .attached by the givers of charity. People will simply not give
= .40-60% of what they earn to support a growing population of people
= .who say it's their "right" to welfare, AFDC (Aid to Families with
= .Dependent Children), WIC (Women, Infants, and Children), food
= .stamps (*), and suchlike.
= .
        well, so far we are, by extortion, in what is labeled as the
    "worlds largest voluntary tax system"

        the problem is that the "entitlemented" are allowed to vote,
    and they outnumber us.  but heaven forbid that the liberal media
    should permit us to disenfranchise or decimate their cadres.

= .(At certain supermarkets I sometimes shop in on the way back to my
= .town, people in front of me in line put their nice cuts of meat
= .down, their fine loaves of bread, their frozen dinner entrees,
= .their "Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream," and then pay for it with books
= .of blue "Department of Agriculture" food stamps. 
=.
        I made a sarcastic comment some month's ago to a companion 
    as we viewed such a scene in a large supermarket (I sing bass or
    contrabass, and it carries).  

        the ensuing ruckus degenerated to a small group of the
    incensed illegals warily looking at the man in black, black
    assassins lid, mirrored aviators....  
        
        intimidation is just another form of communication...  

= .They use their own
= .cash (perhaps gotten by cashing their welfare and "disability"
= .checks) to buy their smokes and booze, as food stamps are not
= .allowed to be spent on this stuff. My impression is that they eat
= .more expensive food than I do, 

        they do, Tim, they do. --and more of it; the fruits of your
    labour!

= .perhaps because they're buying the
= .food with "play money," whereas I'm buying my food with money
= .that's what's left after I had to pay 40-50 taxes, so I seek to
= .economize when I can!)

        they can't add a checkbook or read to pass a driver's
    license, but they can count entitlement money.

        that's all right; after the Federal law killing the require-
    ment for alternative languages, you speak and write English
    to get a driver's license in Utah, or anything else. learn or 
    burn.

= .>            Now, I don't intend to be Scrooge, but I'll fight for
= .>            my rights to cut off at the knees the knee-jerk
= .>            liberals and government slavemeisters who want to tell
= .>            me that I, and 2 others are required to support 100
= .>            freeloaders.

= .And speaking of Scrooge, I like "A Christmas Carol" about as much
= .as anyone I know, and try to take the lesson of what Scrooge
= .learned as a general lesson about life and living it.

        In Dickensonian (I guess it works) England, the employer was
    ethically charged with the care of his employees. Of course,
    this all fits into my concept: 

            "in general, men are basically good 
                --unless it involves money."  

        Unfortunately, very few monied industrialists were
    charitable, and this fact gave FDR the opportunity to start the
    interminable dole, generation after generation of welfare
    _entitlements_.  

        the lazy, the pregnant teenagers on their third child, &c.
    believe they are _entitled_ to pick my pocket, and your pocket.

        at this point < 20% of the population is supporting > 80%
    who are _entitled_ to my support because some bleeding heart
    knee jerk says so.  the federal budget defines these programs as 
    _entitlements_ --they have even dropped the pretense of calling 
    it "aid" or "welfare."  It is a separate budget class by itself
    and does not figure in the stated deficit. and the slimeball 
    Clinton brought in for the Treasury, he already replaced the 
    entitlement funds with a government IOU...

        Scrooge needed to receive the revelation of charity --and to
    accept the principle.  He did.  Charity is not a Christian
    concept; it is fundamental human characteristic present to some
    extent in most humans, and differentiates us from say the ants,
    who cannibalize their fallen comrads.

        I know many good, charitable individuals who are not
    religious, even agnostics.  

        I've always discounted atheism as a conundrum; you can not
    deny before you first identify.

= .(As with "Robin Hood," the message is often confused. Robin Hood
= .was not "stealing from the rich," he was taking back what was
= .stolen from the peasants and farmers by the King and his tax
= .collectors, notably the Sheriff of Notingham. At least this is how
= .I read the myth.)

        you bet!  the Sheriff of Nottingham was _greedy_ and 
    merciless. Robin Hood was only returning the property to the 
    rightful owners  --a lesson missed by most.

        the real question: just how much of a myth is it?  the moral
    would not have been stated and the peasants would not have 
    protected the "merry band" had they been plunderers of the land.

= .--Tim May

        Oh, yes, I forgot to add a special message to "Dr. Dimitri" on
    his Piled higher [and] Deeper throne of cow feces, don't forget
    to address me as "Dr. Attila" 'cause I got a couple of them
    things, too.  

        and if Tim is an old fart, what am I?  I've got at least
    5-10 years on Tim.  --doesn't keep my hand off the cranked
    throttle of my 102 cu in outlaw chopper.

        --attila

--
one of the few things we all share: 
  the utter, corrosive contempt for our elected officials.

Anonymous wrote:
>Tim May wrote:
>
>> The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
>> was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
>> masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."
>
>   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
>their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
>that you whine more.

Actually there is a fundemental difference:  what Tim demands is the
right to be left alone and to be free from exernal influence as long
as what he is doing does not directly hurt another, what "they" demand
is to be taken care of by others because they either cannot or choose not
to take care of themselves.  The latter requires that someone productive
(like Tim) be forced to take care of them through taxation or otherwise
at gunpoint.

In most societies this is considered the difference between a child and
an adult...

jim

Jim McCoy wrote:

> Anonymous wrote:
> >Tim May wrote:
> >
> >> The thing about _traditional_ charity, of the religious or community sort,
> >> was that it was not treated as an "entitlement," as something the resentful
> >> masses could "demand" as part of their "human rights."
> >
> >   There's no substantial difference between their resentful whining about
> >their rights and your resentful whining about your rights - except maybe
> >that you whine more.
> 
> Actually there is a fundemental difference:  what Tim demands is the
> right to be left alone and to be free from exernal influence as long
> as what he is doing does not directly hurt another, what "they" demand
> is to be taken care of by others because they either cannot or choose not
> to take care of themselves.  The latter requires that someone productive
> (like Tim) be forced to take care of them through taxation or otherwise
> at gunpoint.

   Tim is not productive. He *was* productive, but not anymore; his wealth
might be productive in some indirect way, but it it certainly severable
from him. He demands to be left alone by certain socio-economic
apparatuses (socialized welfare) but is quite content to rely on the
existence of other such apparatuses (investment entities, banks). Whether
*that* is "hypocritical" doesn't interest me; I merely pointed out that he
is constantly and resentfully whining about his own "rights" and about
others' lack thereof--in that regard, he's of a kind with the people he is
forever griping about.

> In most societies this is considered the difference between a child and
> an adult...

   This is a silly statement of the kind often made by people who have no
solid grasp of history or social organization: most societies that
radically differ from our own in their ways of maintaining/supervising
their members (successful or not) have apparatuses so invasive and
arbitrary that, in comparison, the IRS and assorted other bureaucracies
look pretty benign.

nobody@replay.com (Anonymous) writes:
>    Tim is not productive. He *was* productive, but not anymore; his wealth
Tim has no life. That's why he posts lies, personal attacks, and flame bait
to this mailing list and drives away and and all crypto discussion.
> > In most societies this is considered the difference between a child and
> > an adult...
> 
>    This is a silly statement of the kind often made by people who have no
> solid grasp of history or social organization: most societies that
> radically differ from our own in their ways of maintaining/supervising
> their members (successful or not) have apparatuses so invasive and
> arbitrary that, in comparison, the IRS and assorted other bureaucracies
> look pretty benign.
Yes - he's a typical mediocre product of the U.S. public education system.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps