One reason to cross out future discussion about American politics with you after this discourse. The President is an integral part of our government.
It's not "my government". If you believe it is "your government", then have at it - but don't include me. I do not believe in the involuntary "WE".
Ok so tell us what you do then. What is your 'activism'?
I encourage people to find nonpolitical solutions to their problems. The precise methods I use are not a matter for discussion on a public forum, but you can get the general idea from the fact that I am an agorist.
I sure hope it is something beyond so called enlightening through protests.
No, I think protests are fairly useless beyond meeting likeminded people, and not the best way to do that, either.
Because all I see are childish
"Childish", meaning, "not in agreement with the majority"? Or what else do you mean? Because as far as I can see you're just engaging in namecalling against someone who disagrees with you, something which you should have grown out of in elementary school.
Yes, I am an anarchist. Are you trying to insult me by using a word that I use to describe myself? Try calling me a "Christian" next. Maybe I'll cry.
Wow, three nasty names in a row.
Something else I've noticed on the internet - people tend to call arguments from their opponents "pedantic" and then refuse to address the contents of the actual arguments. That is called
ad hominem, and it's usually considered very bad form. But apparently it's all you have, since you've done nothing to address the points I have been making. What you've said boils down in essence to "you're welcome to your own opinion, but you're [insert bad name here] for having it". That is nothing resembling mature, rational discussion.
ramblings coming from a citizen
I'm not a citizen. A citizen (according to Brown's law dictionary) is a person who owes a debt of allegiance to a state in exchange for a responsibility by the state to protect him. But my allegiance is to Christ alone, and even the government's own Supreme Court has admitted that they have no responsibility to protect their so-called "citizens".
who got so fed up with our troubled government that he's lost his rational thinking.
Namecalling again. Show me where anything that I have said is irrational. I suggest that what is irrational is the belief that winning a popularity contest gives anyone the right to do things which, when done by anyone else, would justly be considered a crime.
So no matter how much you don't like it...you will be begging the government for more freedoms if your freedoms are taken away.
No, I won't. I refuse to grovel before false gods.
I would also love to see what freedoms are being taken away from you.
Let's start here: I believe that the wars waged by the U.S. military are completely immoral. I believe that what the state calls "collateral damage" is nothing but mass murder. Am I free to withhold from the state they money that they use to pay for those wars? Am I free to disagree in action, or am I free only to voice my objections while I am forced, under the threat of violence against me, to finance murder?
That's just one of many examples.
Wow...you have turned a few heads to your thinking. Religious people do that and the world stays the same. Non-believers do that and the world stays the same. If you want to compare between voting and what you do, I and others here at least contributed to society(regardless of who we voted for) instead of only winning arguments with a few weak minded political folk.
You have merely agreed with a system that has the power to force its way on people. Anyone can go along to get along with a bully. That is not an accomplishment. Convincing someone to stand up for their principles even when it puts them against an entire political apparatus and its mass of supporters takes a bit more effort.
Always remember...if we are a government of the people
Bull. Do you have the power to throw your neighbors in cages for not doing what you consider to be "moral"? Do you have the power to commit murder and excuse it as "collateral damage"? Do you have the power to counterfeit money? Do you have the power to take money by force to fund whatever you think justifies it? Do you have the power to create territorial monopolies and throw people in cages for competing with them without permission?
No, you don't. But the political class does, and they exercise those powers as a matter of course. The political class is quite distinct from the people, in that they act under a sense of self-righteous moral superiority that permits them to do things which are, by the morals of individual people, criminal.
Real change takes time and the American people need to know this.
Real change requires people to make different assumptions about what is moral and what is not. Until people stop believing that criminals turn into heroes when they win popularity contests (which is just as silly as believing they become heroes when they wear crowns and sit on thrones), NOTHING will change.
So what do you actually argue for?
Liberty. Solutions to the worlds problems that are based in love and mutual respect instead of violence and threats. An end to the idea that anyone could possibly be wise enough or moral enough to make decisions that affect millions of other people, and that enforcing those decisions through violence against the will of many of those millions could ever be moral.
Are you just the antagonist in Atlas Shrugged?
No, that would be the government.
Are you John Galt and nothing more?
No, John Galt cared only for himself to the exclusion of all others. My political philosophy is based upon the words of Jesus Christ, who was quite different to say the least.
