<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama Warns Africa That Corruption Undermines Democracy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 04:35:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5243332</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 14:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5243332</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I get you love the state and believe in it with all your heart and soul&quot;

I love basing my opinions on reality. With all of my heart and soul.

&quot;You think people are so bad that they must be controlled by a huge gang using threats and violence&quot;

That&#039;s overly simplistic. But there are enough bad people and powerful technologies to empower them that states will emerge. It&#039;s organic. What&#039;s your explanation? They pop up independent of one another. You do realize that, don&#039;t you?  You think this concept of states is some grand conspiracy when in reality there are lots of alternatives? There are lots of alternatives within the concept of states, but not alternatives to replace them, unless you have one global state. Which I hope is not what you had in mind.

Study history from a rational perspective first and then try to find out how you&#039;re going to re-engineer the nature of man.

&quot;But what you don&#039;t get logically is that if people are so bad and must be controlled by force how can good people be found to do the controlling and to employ the force in a moral and fair way?&quot;

Checks and balances. But even if we didn&#039;t come up with that, it&#039;s undeniable that you have no choice. States emerge organically, This is undeniable. It&#039;s so undeniable that it makes your fantasy incredibly delusional. If you recognize these ideas as just that, ideals, that&#039;s fine. Maybe you&#039;ll inspire people to push for smaller government and more stringent adherence to the principals of checks and balances.

But if you really think there is any chance at all that a &quot;stateless society&quot; could ever come about...it boggles the mind that you spend so much time on the ideals without looking at the realities.

&quot;History proves that is a fantasy, a utopian idea.&quot;

This makes no sense. All I said was that you can&#039;t possible achieve a stateless society. I didn&#039;t say my ideas were close to Utopia, I said they were based on reality because, well, I&#039;m talking about what we have now.

But it&#039;s interesting that you mention Utopia because as you say, we can&#039;t build Utopia with states. Or people. So we&#039;re kind of stuck with doing the best we can with the realities we&#039;re stuck with.

That doesn&#039;t mean that all idealists are wasting our time. It just means that you&#039;ve got to sort of test your ideas first before insisting that the status quo is something we should consider delusional (what irony) or something we should strive to destroy the way the communists want us to.

&quot;Of course Ebay as a company is subject to government force and control as are all businesses due to government monopolies. But that force plays no part in the decision I make to buy and from whom and vice versa.&quot;

So what we&#039;ve got to do is find all of the awesome people like you and kill the rest. Then you won&#039;t need force. You won&#039;t need states telling you what to do because everyone will be so awesome. Now that sounds like the best way to build Utopia on earth. Or maybe Mars would be a better first trial.

Do you drive a vehicle? Do you hope not to be hit by drunk drivers? No state needed. Just kill all of the people who are genetically predisposed to drink.

You have to deal with society as it is, or at least society at its best if you think you&#039;re such an awesome leader. So please show me a society that managed to live in the way that you describe. What&#039;s your excuse if you can&#039;t do that?

&quot;Enjoy the chains which you love so much because you can&#039;t even conceive of a world without them. Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.&quot;

I can conceive perfectly of what you propose. I&#039;ve been around lots of places. You live in a bubble. Or you plan on killing a lot of people when you kill the states to create your &quot;so realistic&quot; stateless society.

&quot;Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.&quot;

Yeah. That&#039;s the problem. I&#039;m not arguing in support of a system. States are organic. You don&#039;t have civilization without states. And modern technology is omnipresent in most parts of the world, so you&#039;re not going to be able to remove all remnants of civilization.

Therefore, while states are not quite as predictable as gravity, they&#039;re nearly as inevitable. My love or wishes have nothing and I mean nothing at all to do with it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I get you love the state and believe in it with all your heart and soul&#8221;</p>
<p>I love basing my opinions on reality. With all of my heart and soul.</p>
<p>&#8220;You think people are so bad that they must be controlled by a huge gang using threats and violence&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s overly simplistic. But there are enough bad people and powerful technologies to empower them that states will emerge. It&#8217;s organic. What&#8217;s your explanation? They pop up independent of one another. You do realize that, don&#8217;t you?  You think this concept of states is some grand conspiracy when in reality there are lots of alternatives? There are lots of alternatives within the concept of states, but not alternatives to replace them, unless you have one global state. Which I hope is not what you had in mind.</p>
<p>Study history from a rational perspective first and then try to find out how you&#8217;re going to re-engineer the nature of man.</p>
<p>&#8220;But what you don&#8217;t get logically is that if people are so bad and must be controlled by force how can good people be found to do the controlling and to employ the force in a moral and fair way?&#8221;</p>
<p>Checks and balances. But even if we didn&#8217;t come up with that, it&#8217;s undeniable that you have no choice. States emerge organically, This is undeniable. It&#8217;s so undeniable that it makes your fantasy incredibly delusional. If you recognize these ideas as just that, ideals, that&#8217;s fine. Maybe you&#8217;ll inspire people to push for smaller government and more stringent adherence to the principals of checks and balances.</p>
<p>But if you really think there is any chance at all that a &#8220;stateless society&#8221; could ever come about&#8230;it boggles the mind that you spend so much time on the ideals without looking at the realities.</p>
<p>&#8220;History proves that is a fantasy, a utopian idea.&#8221;</p>
<p>This makes no sense. All I said was that you can&#8217;t possible achieve a stateless society. I didn&#8217;t say my ideas were close to Utopia, I said they were based on reality because, well, I&#8217;m talking about what we have now.</p>
<p>But it&#8217;s interesting that you mention Utopia because as you say, we can&#8217;t build Utopia with states. Or people. So we&#8217;re kind of stuck with doing the best we can with the realities we&#8217;re stuck with.</p>
<p>That doesn&#8217;t mean that all idealists are wasting our time. It just means that you&#8217;ve got to sort of test your ideas first before insisting that the status quo is something we should consider delusional (what irony) or something we should strive to destroy the way the communists want us to.</p>
<p>&#8220;Of course Ebay as a company is subject to government force and control as are all businesses due to government monopolies. But that force plays no part in the decision I make to buy and from whom and vice versa.&#8221;</p>
<p>So what we&#8217;ve got to do is find all of the awesome people like you and kill the rest. Then you won&#8217;t need force. You won&#8217;t need states telling you what to do because everyone will be so awesome. Now that sounds like the best way to build Utopia on earth. Or maybe Mars would be a better first trial.</p>
<p>Do you drive a vehicle? Do you hope not to be hit by drunk drivers? No state needed. Just kill all of the people who are genetically predisposed to drink.</p>
<p>You have to deal with society as it is, or at least society at its best if you think you&#8217;re such an awesome leader. So please show me a society that managed to live in the way that you describe. What&#8217;s your excuse if you can&#8217;t do that?</p>
<p>&#8220;Enjoy the chains which you love so much because you can&#8217;t even conceive of a world without them. Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.&#8221;</p>
<p>I can conceive perfectly of what you propose. I&#8217;ve been around lots of places. You live in a bubble. Or you plan on killing a lot of people when you kill the states to create your &#8220;so realistic&#8221; stateless society.</p>
<p>&#8220;Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yeah. That&#8217;s the problem. I&#8217;m not arguing in support of a system. States are organic. You don&#8217;t have civilization without states. And modern technology is omnipresent in most parts of the world, so you&#8217;re not going to be able to remove all remnants of civilization.</p>
<p>Therefore, while states are not quite as predictable as gravity, they&#8217;re nearly as inevitable. My love or wishes have nothing and I mean nothing at all to do with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5243322</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5243322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I get you love the state and believe in it with all your heart and soul. Good for you. You think people are so bad that they must be controlled by a huge gang using threats and violence. But what you don&#039;t get logically is that if people are so bad and must be controlled by force how can good people be found to do the controlling and to employ the force in a moral and fair way? History proves that is a fantasy, a utopian idea.

When I buy on Ebay and I choose to only do business with the top sellers the government is not involved. I trust them based on their rating to deliver what they promise and they trust me to pay them based on my rating. Government force doesn&#039;t enter the picture. 


Of course Ebay as a company is subject to government force and control as are all businesses due to government monopolies. But that force plays no part in the decision I make to buy and from whom and vice versa.

Enjoy the chains which you love so much because you can&#039;t even conceive of a world without them. Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I get you love the state and believe in it with all your heart and soul. Good for you. You think people are so bad that they must be controlled by a huge gang using threats and violence. But what you don&#8217;t get logically is that if people are so bad and must be controlled by force how can good people be found to do the controlling and to employ the force in a moral and fair way? History proves that is a fantasy, a utopian idea.</p>
<p>When I buy on Ebay and I choose to only do business with the top sellers the government is not involved. I trust them based on their rating to deliver what they promise and they trust me to pay them based on my rating. Government force doesn&#8217;t enter the picture. </p>
<p>Of course Ebay as a company is subject to government force and control as are all businesses due to government monopolies. But that force plays no part in the decision I make to buy and from whom and vice versa.</p>
<p>Enjoy the chains which you love so much because you can&#8217;t even conceive of a world without them. Change is never brought about by people who embrace the status quo and that applies to the system you argue for now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5242596</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5242596</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;You&#039;re missing the point about Ebay completely. Ebay works because people trust other people based on their ratings, which are indicative of how honest they are and how they conduct business. Those ratings have nothing to do with &quot;law enforcement agencies&quot; or the threat of violence they initiate.&quot;

The site itself would not be able to operate if it could not rely on government enforcement. In your imagination it could. 

I understand completely. PayPal requires that people pay their bills. Other banks need to pursue fraud investigations. Crime is a fact of life, therefore law enforcement is a fact of life unless you find an isolated commune that none of the criminals can find. I&#039;m suggesting that your commune will not get very big before a criminal element emerges from within even if you can manage to isolate yourself from the rest of the world.

&quot;The threats you bring up regarding the island are &quot;state&quot; threats. In a stateless society those threats wouldn&#039;t exist although there would still be bad people who would want to control and harm others. They just couldn&#039;t use the awesome power of a state to do it.&quot;





Where is this &quot;stateless society?&quot; After I wrote the last time, I realized I should not have suggested an island but instead a new planet out of reach of our tainted civilization. You can take all of the sinless people there and start fresh.


You have a lot in common with Marx.


Study the medieval period in Europe and in reality that&#039;s as close as you can get to what you suggest. Most of the men were armed.


Except now people are more enlightened you&#039;ll say, and I&#039;ll laugh.

I forgot to ask you, in this &quot;stateless society&quot; who will ensure (I didn&#039;t say &#039;enforce&#039;) that no states will form?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You&#8217;re missing the point about Ebay completely. Ebay works because people trust other people based on their ratings, which are indicative of how honest they are and how they conduct business. Those ratings have nothing to do with &#8220;law enforcement agencies&#8221; or the threat of violence they initiate.&#8221;</p>
<p>The site itself would not be able to operate if it could not rely on government enforcement. In your imagination it could. </p>
<p>I understand completely. PayPal requires that people pay their bills. Other banks need to pursue fraud investigations. Crime is a fact of life, therefore law enforcement is a fact of life unless you find an isolated commune that none of the criminals can find. I&#8217;m suggesting that your commune will not get very big before a criminal element emerges from within even if you can manage to isolate yourself from the rest of the world.</p>
<p>&#8220;The threats you bring up regarding the island are &#8220;state&#8221; threats. In a stateless society those threats wouldn&#8217;t exist although there would still be bad people who would want to control and harm others. They just couldn&#8217;t use the awesome power of a state to do it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Where is this &#8220;stateless society?&#8221; After I wrote the last time, I realized I should not have suggested an island but instead a new planet out of reach of our tainted civilization. You can take all of the sinless people there and start fresh.</p>
<p>You have a lot in common with Marx.</p>
<p>Study the medieval period in Europe and in reality that&#8217;s as close as you can get to what you suggest. Most of the men were armed.</p>
<p>Except now people are more enlightened you&#8217;ll say, and I&#8217;ll laugh.</p>
<p>I forgot to ask you, in this &#8220;stateless society&#8221; who will ensure (I didn&#8217;t say &#8216;enforce&#8217;) that no states will form?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5242358</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5242358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;re missing the point about Ebay completely. Ebay works because people trust other people based on their ratings, which are indicative of how honest they are and how they conduct business. Those ratings have nothing to do with &quot;law enforcement agencies&quot; or the threat of violence they initiate. 
The threats you bring up regarding the island are &quot;state&quot; threats. In a stateless society those threats wouldn&#039;t exist although there would still be bad people who would want to control and harm others. They just couldn&#039;t use the awesome power of a state to do it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re missing the point about Ebay completely. Ebay works because people trust other people based on their ratings, which are indicative of how honest they are and how they conduct business. Those ratings have nothing to do with &#8220;law enforcement agencies&#8221; or the threat of violence they initiate.<br />
The threats you bring up regarding the island are &#8220;state&#8221; threats. In a stateless society those threats wouldn&#8217;t exist although there would still be bad people who would want to control and harm others. They just couldn&#8217;t use the awesome power of a state to do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5242232</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5242232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;No possible way I could debate you here. You believe in force and you believe that only through systematic force can order among people be achieved.&quot;

Correct. Not because I &quot;love&quot; to use &quot;violence&quot; but because I&#039;ve been down this road with many delusional people for more years than you&#039;ve probably been alive.

&quot;Ebay is a regulated business but it operates on trust and ratings, neither of which entail the initiation of force.&quot;

Most of our lives involve voluntary adherence to agreements. But in the end, most of the order comes from the fact that when someone does step over the line, we have courts and police to enforce those promises. Some apparently peaceful people know that too. 

Ebay also uses law enforcement agencies. If you think they don&#039;t, you ought to look in to it. And if anyone should be able to invent new rules like you suggest it would be an Internet community. They would not be able to engage in trade except maybe on a very small scale.

What you&#039;re talking about might work for a very small commune on an island that no sovereign had any interest in.

&quot;I would love to move to an island and start a new society. I figure about 2 million will purchase a suitable island.&quot;

How did I know that? Let&#039;s explore this and see where it goes.

 You can&#039;t share borders with anyone. You probably can&#039;t trade much of anything with anyone. No banks.



So a community farm on an island is fine. Better hope nobody ever finds any valuable resources anywhere near it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;No possible way I could debate you here. You believe in force and you believe that only through systematic force can order among people be achieved.&#8221;</p>
<p>Correct. Not because I &#8220;love&#8221; to use &#8220;violence&#8221; but because I&#8217;ve been down this road with many delusional people for more years than you&#8217;ve probably been alive.</p>
<p>&#8220;Ebay is a regulated business but it operates on trust and ratings, neither of which entail the initiation of force.&#8221;</p>
<p>Most of our lives involve voluntary adherence to agreements. But in the end, most of the order comes from the fact that when someone does step over the line, we have courts and police to enforce those promises. Some apparently peaceful people know that too. </p>
<p>Ebay also uses law enforcement agencies. If you think they don&#8217;t, you ought to look in to it. And if anyone should be able to invent new rules like you suggest it would be an Internet community. They would not be able to engage in trade except maybe on a very small scale.</p>
<p>What you&#8217;re talking about might work for a very small commune on an island that no sovereign had any interest in.</p>
<p>&#8220;I would love to move to an island and start a new society. I figure about 2 million will purchase a suitable island.&#8221;</p>
<p>How did I know that? Let&#8217;s explore this and see where it goes.</p>
<p> You can&#8217;t share borders with anyone. You probably can&#8217;t trade much of anything with anyone. No banks.</p>
<p>So a community farm on an island is fine. Better hope nobody ever finds any valuable resources anywhere near it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5242226</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5242226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No possible way I could debate you here. You believe in force and you believe that only through systematic force can order among people be achieved. I disagree and have studied the issue at length. So you have read the book?

Ebay is a regulated business but it operates on trust and ratings, neither of which entail the initiation of force.
I would love to move to an island and start a new society. I figure about 2 million will purchase a suitable island.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No possible way I could debate you here. You believe in force and you believe that only through systematic force can order among people be achieved. I disagree and have studied the issue at length. So you have read the book?</p>
<p>Ebay is a regulated business but it operates on trust and ratings, neither of which entail the initiation of force.<br />
I would love to move to an island and start a new society. I figure about 2 million will purchase a suitable island.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5242061</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 00:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5242061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Order and rules don&#039;t have to be based on force which is what all government is based on and ALL government operates by theft.&quot;

Enforcing rules is theft. Having suggestions is not. It leads to anarchy very quickly.

Some times delusional people come up with ideas about how the world should be, forgetting that people will live in this world and pursue their own agendas. No coercion means you have anarchy. Maybe not on your ideal first day, but once people live their lives and conflict occurs naturally among men, you will have either rules enforced or you will have anarchy. It&#039;s just that simple, once you have real humans living under this theoretical Utopia of yours.

That&#039;s also why communism can&#039;t work. Humans are not fungible. You can&#039;t create a perfect balanced or even non-coercive society from above. You can even say that anarchy is the complete lack of ordered coercion. You instead get chaotic coercion. But hey, at least it&#039;s not a government.

&quot;If people want peace and security and order they can accomplish it without resorting to theft and violence. Property can be protected in a number of ways without a government. First, by the individual owner directly using weapons, locks, security measures, technology, etc. Second, indirectly by insurance and hiring private security and protection services. None of those measure require giving a huge gang a monopoly on the initiation of violence in a given geographic area.&quot;

I think you&#039;re confused. In the end, all of the people who rely on those intermediate methods are also relying on government for security.

&quot;Ebay is an example of a free market which works well without any government or violence.&quot;

You&#039;re quite wrong. Ebay is regulated and when people break the law, any enforcement of those laws would require...force or coercion. Ebay is largely an Internet based company, so citing low levels of violence is just stupid. Sorry. It is. Unless you plan to live your entire life exclusively on the Internet and you plan to have &quot;an Internet community&quot; protect your property rights. Good luck.

&quot;You should read the free book, &quot;Practical Anarchy&quot; by Stefan Molyneux. It contains many ideas of how a stateless society might work.&quot;

I already know. Practical anarchy is less likely than Islamic peace. You&#039;re practiced at propagating ideas but not too good at considering that your delusions are not realistic.



I&#039;ll tell you what. I&#039;ll pay for an island to start a new...society run your way if you can articulate a clear plan on how you will live. You&#039;ll have to answer a few practical questions before I secure the title for you.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Order and rules don&#8217;t have to be based on force which is what all government is based on and ALL government operates by theft.&#8221;</p>
<p>Enforcing rules is theft. Having suggestions is not. It leads to anarchy very quickly.</p>
<p>Some times delusional people come up with ideas about how the world should be, forgetting that people will live in this world and pursue their own agendas. No coercion means you have anarchy. Maybe not on your ideal first day, but once people live their lives and conflict occurs naturally among men, you will have either rules enforced or you will have anarchy. It&#8217;s just that simple, once you have real humans living under this theoretical Utopia of yours.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s also why communism can&#8217;t work. Humans are not fungible. You can&#8217;t create a perfect balanced or even non-coercive society from above. You can even say that anarchy is the complete lack of ordered coercion. You instead get chaotic coercion. But hey, at least it&#8217;s not a government.</p>
<p>&#8220;If people want peace and security and order they can accomplish it without resorting to theft and violence. Property can be protected in a number of ways without a government. First, by the individual owner directly using weapons, locks, security measures, technology, etc. Second, indirectly by insurance and hiring private security and protection services. None of those measure require giving a huge gang a monopoly on the initiation of violence in a given geographic area.&#8221;</p>
<p>I think you&#8217;re confused. In the end, all of the people who rely on those intermediate methods are also relying on government for security.</p>
<p>&#8220;Ebay is an example of a free market which works well without any government or violence.&#8221;</p>
<p>You&#8217;re quite wrong. Ebay is regulated and when people break the law, any enforcement of those laws would require&#8230;force or coercion. Ebay is largely an Internet based company, so citing low levels of violence is just stupid. Sorry. It is. Unless you plan to live your entire life exclusively on the Internet and you plan to have &#8220;an Internet community&#8221; protect your property rights. Good luck.</p>
<p>&#8220;You should read the free book, &#8220;Practical Anarchy&#8221; by Stefan Molyneux. It contains many ideas of how a stateless society might work.&#8221;</p>
<p>I already know. Practical anarchy is less likely than Islamic peace. You&#8217;re practiced at propagating ideas but not too good at considering that your delusions are not realistic.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll tell you what. I&#8217;ll pay for an island to start a new&#8230;society run your way if you can articulate a clear plan on how you will live. You&#8217;ll have to answer a few practical questions before I secure the title for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5241796</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5241796</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Order and rules don&#039;t have to be based on force which is what all government is based on and ALL government operates by theft. If people want peace and security and order they can accomplish it without resorting to theft and violence. Property can be protected in a number of ways without a government. First, by the individual owner directly using weapons, locks, security measures, technology, etc. Second, indirectly by insurance and hiring private security and protection services. None of those measure require giving a huge gang a monopoly on the initiation of violence in a given geographic area.
Technology has advanced to the point where government is a dinosaur. It stifles innovation and creativity and hampers meaningful change as it maintains a monopoly over almost every aspect of a persons life. And it is based on violence which is immoral.
Ebay is an example of a free market which works well without any government or violence. You should read the free book, &quot;Practical Anarchy&quot; by Stefan Molyneux. It contains many ideas of how a stateless  society might work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Order and rules don&#8217;t have to be based on force which is what all government is based on and ALL government operates by theft. If people want peace and security and order they can accomplish it without resorting to theft and violence. Property can be protected in a number of ways without a government. First, by the individual owner directly using weapons, locks, security measures, technology, etc. Second, indirectly by insurance and hiring private security and protection services. None of those measure require giving a huge gang a monopoly on the initiation of violence in a given geographic area.<br />
Technology has advanced to the point where government is a dinosaur. It stifles innovation and creativity and hampers meaningful change as it maintains a monopoly over almost every aspect of a persons life. And it is based on violence which is immoral.<br />
Ebay is an example of a free market which works well without any government or violence. You should read the free book, &#8220;Practical Anarchy&#8221; by Stefan Molyneux. It contains many ideas of how a stateless  society might work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5241446</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jul 2013 13:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5241446</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Criticism of the left is racist too. Right is white so left must be black.


Chess is racist. Why do you suppose they use black against white pieces?


Coca Cola is black too, because they&#039;re trying to kill blacks with sugar and take their hard earned money.


The black sea isn&#039;t actually black but they gave it that name to demean &quot;blacks.&quot;


Charcoal is racist. The night time is racist. Why else would you find references to black? Hmm?!!?!?


You need to meet some &quot;black&quot; conservatives for a weekend retreat where you&#039;re forced to listen for at least half an hour. Then you might mellow out. There are even black moderates who are fairly leftist when it comes to race relations, but at least you can have a rational conversation with them.

Colin Powell is a bit delusional, but he&#039;s not always a waste of time to listen to. He at least adds value even if one must correct for his bias. That&#039;s OK.


You&#039;re no Colin Powell, that&#039;s for sure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Criticism of the left is racist too. Right is white so left must be black.</p>
<p>Chess is racist. Why do you suppose they use black against white pieces?</p>
<p>Coca Cola is black too, because they&#8217;re trying to kill blacks with sugar and take their hard earned money.</p>
<p>The black sea isn&#8217;t actually black but they gave it that name to demean &#8220;blacks.&#8221;</p>
<p>Charcoal is racist. The night time is racist. Why else would you find references to black? Hmm?!!?!?</p>
<p>You need to meet some &#8220;black&#8221; conservatives for a weekend retreat where you&#8217;re forced to listen for at least half an hour. Then you might mellow out. There are even black moderates who are fairly leftist when it comes to race relations, but at least you can have a rational conversation with them.</p>
<p>Colin Powell is a bit delusional, but he&#8217;s not always a waste of time to listen to. He at least adds value even if one must correct for his bias. That&#8217;s OK.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re no Colin Powell, that&#8217;s for sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5241433</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jul 2013 12:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5241433</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Government is the biggest violator of property rights. Its basis of operation is theft of private property.&quot;

Which government? It&#039;s basis is theft? Communist governments, sure.

In the USA, if you consider all taxes as theft, then your stuck. Because it&#039;s hard to fund the real world mechanisms that protect your property rights without taking some income from somewhere.

What&#039;s your Utopian suggestion for improvements to the US constitution?

&quot;The free market could and would come up with systems to protect private property far better that government could.&quot;

But who would ensure that each private entity was abiding by the constitution? That&#039;s delusional. And what distinguishes these &quot;free market&quot; entities from &quot;government&quot; if they are able to achieve an acceptable standard of law and order?

The essential function of government is to govern. No government means no governing. That means anarchy. 


Your idea might be little fiefdoms again, if that&#039;s what you&#039;re dreaming of. Or perhaps you hadn&#039;t gotten that far. But even then at some level if you have rules, someone enforces them. That&#039;s government.

&quot;You haven&#039;t studied enough and believe the government&#039;s propaganda.&quot;

Ahh. *I&#039;m* delusional. Which propaganda is it that you think I believe? My skepticism of your philosophy and delusion doesn&#039;t mean that I accept anyone else&#039;s delusions instead.

&quot;Depends on whose brand of law and order there is.&quot;



Sure. But if you have law and order outside of your dreams, it means you also have a government.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Government is the biggest violator of property rights. Its basis of operation is theft of private property.&#8221;</p>
<p>Which government? It&#8217;s basis is theft? Communist governments, sure.</p>
<p>In the USA, if you consider all taxes as theft, then your stuck. Because it&#8217;s hard to fund the real world mechanisms that protect your property rights without taking some income from somewhere.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s your Utopian suggestion for improvements to the US constitution?</p>
<p>&#8220;The free market could and would come up with systems to protect private property far better that government could.&#8221;</p>
<p>But who would ensure that each private entity was abiding by the constitution? That&#8217;s delusional. And what distinguishes these &#8220;free market&#8221; entities from &#8220;government&#8221; if they are able to achieve an acceptable standard of law and order?</p>
<p>The essential function of government is to govern. No government means no governing. That means anarchy. </p>
<p>Your idea might be little fiefdoms again, if that&#8217;s what you&#8217;re dreaming of. Or perhaps you hadn&#8217;t gotten that far. But even then at some level if you have rules, someone enforces them. That&#8217;s government.</p>
<p>&#8220;You haven&#8217;t studied enough and believe the government&#8217;s propaganda.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ahh. *I&#8217;m* delusional. Which propaganda is it that you think I believe? My skepticism of your philosophy and delusion doesn&#8217;t mean that I accept anyone else&#8217;s delusions instead.</p>
<p>&#8220;Depends on whose brand of law and order there is.&#8221;</p>
<p>Sure. But if you have law and order outside of your dreams, it means you also have a government.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5241420</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jul 2013 12:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5241420</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Government is the biggest violator of property rights. Its basis of operation is theft of private property.

The free market could and would come up with systems to protect private property far better that government could.
You haven&#039;t studied enough and believe the government&#039;s propaganda.
Depends on whose brand of law and order there is. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Government is the biggest violator of property rights. Its basis of operation is theft of private property.</p>
<p>The free market could and would come up with systems to protect private property far better that government could.<br />
You haven&#8217;t studied enough and believe the government&#8217;s propaganda.<br />
Depends on whose brand of law and order there is. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OfficialPro</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240754</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[OfficialPro]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240754</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Talk about the pot and the *&amp;^%ing kettle!&quot; - Denis Leary]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Talk about the pot and the *&amp;^%ing kettle!&#8221; &#8211; Denis Leary</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240391</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 23:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Without private property nobody would produce anything that took great effort and capital and thus you would have no real technological advancements. If people don&#039;t profit or gain from their labors they won&#039;t produce much at all.&quot;


I agree. My point is that you seem clueless about the positive role of government in protecting property rights. There is a role for government. Anarchists are delusional.



Without government, armed robbery would be about the only thing you&#039;d have to determine who controls what property.


Law and order is good. You don&#039;t have law and order without some kind of government. That&#039;s especially true today.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Without private property nobody would produce anything that took great effort and capital and thus you would have no real technological advancements. If people don&#8217;t profit or gain from their labors they won&#8217;t produce much at all.&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree. My point is that you seem clueless about the positive role of government in protecting property rights. There is a role for government. Anarchists are delusional.</p>
<p>Without government, armed robbery would be about the only thing you&#8217;d have to determine who controls what property.</p>
<p>Law and order is good. You don&#8217;t have law and order without some kind of government. That&#8217;s especially true today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240204</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 13:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240204</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just because somebody wrote a book stating that falsehood doesn&#039;t change reality. Without private property nobody would produce anything that took great effort and capital and thus you would have no real technological advancements. If people don&#039;t profit or gain from their labors they won&#039;t produce much at all.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just because somebody wrote a book stating that falsehood doesn&#8217;t change reality. Without private property nobody would produce anything that took great effort and capital and thus you would have no real technological advancements. If people don&#8217;t profit or gain from their labors they won&#8217;t produce much at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: maquignon</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240081</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[maquignon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 03:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama certainly IS the ideal figure to lecture on corruption!!!  He knows more about it than anybody alive!!! He is an expert on dishonesty, lying, corruption and ineptness.  We could take an example from the Egyptians.  They don&#039;t tolerate dishonest, corrupt, lying, inept tyrants who cozy up to the Muslem Brotherhood.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama certainly IS the ideal figure to lecture on corruption!!!  He knows more about it than anybody alive!!! He is an expert on dishonesty, lying, corruption and ineptness.  We could take an example from the Egyptians.  They don&#8217;t tolerate dishonest, corrupt, lying, inept tyrants who cozy up to the Muslem Brotherhood.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harry Black</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240076</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harry Black]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 03:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240076</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nothing like a coherent, well-thought-out comment.  No wonder Frontpage is famous for its subtlety and intellectual as well as its political sophistication.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nothing like a coherent, well-thought-out comment.  No wonder Frontpage is famous for its subtlety and intellectual as well as its political sophistication.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ziggy zoggy</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5240070</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ziggy zoggy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 02:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5240070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Take your hopelessly retarded sophistry back to whichever commie college spawned it, short bus.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Take your hopelessly retarded sophistry back to whichever commie college spawned it, short bus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5239981</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 22:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5239981</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://www.amazon.com/dp/1849350248]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1849350248" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/dp/1849350248</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greg scott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5239775</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[greg scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 14:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5239775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Property is theft? That makes no sense whatsoever.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Property is theft? That makes no sense whatsoever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T.A.</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/obama-warns-africa-that-corruption-undermines-democracy/comment-page-1/#comment-5239755</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[T.A.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 13:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=195187#comment-5239755</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[African leaders certainly have less in their pot of gold to work with. However, if they pocket a larger percentage, they are more corrupt. 



Really, it strains the imagination to propose, with no evidence, they are less corrupt than Obama.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>African leaders certainly have less in their pot of gold to work with. However, if they pocket a larger percentage, they are more corrupt. </p>
<p>Really, it strains the imagination to propose, with no evidence, they are less corrupt than Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 805/856 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 23:35:39 by W3 Total Cache -->