Viking-Saxon gold 'Stolen'

[Notafront4adragon]

1 hour ago, silenceissilver said:

It's called logic.

 

I have said you use communist propaganda terms. But of course it is true government interference and the potential thereof makes property fiat property, thus your arguments certainly have some some communist qualities.

 

I didn't say you called me a crook but that you referred to me as a crook.

 

 

Thanks for pointing out my argument. Taxation is theft, actually robbery or what do you call it when you are forced to give your money to someone else under the threat of getting kidnapped, if you don't? Yet you call resisting the criminals in government stealing. That's the satanic upside down principle I mentioned, before. Paying taxes has nothing to do with decency or moral obligations but with threat, violence and force.

 

I can see you are reacting with arrogance to ideas that you don't understand or don't want to understand.

 

You might want to read again, what I criticized - the role of the government.

 

"So you are saying", lol. Reminds me of a certain interview with Jordan Peterson. I didn't say poor people should pay less, I said they would pay less for security, in a free market society which is the way to organise it.

Ok you don't want to pay taxes or worse currently actively evade it and the government is out to rob you.

Fine that's your interpretation and opinion, I would ask why therefore why haven't chosen to leave Great Britain since you dont want to contribute to it. Set up your own anarchist society. You want all the benefits of a well ordered society, which requires taxation, but you don't want to pay your way. 

Also there's nothing logical about religion; Satanism or otherwise.

 

[silenceissilver]

It's a myth that a well organized society requires taxation. Even poor people could afford to pay for their own security if there was no poverty creating government. The alternative is called private law society, look up Hans Herman Hoppe. Admittedly, it wouldn't work in a multicultural society though.

With all my donations to make the UK a better place, I could probably have bought 50% extra gold coins. In a private law society many more people would pay much more for good causes, because most people would be better off, particularly the poor.

Any Christ must rejected any government. It's in the Bible, Satan rules the world, that means governments do. And of course, there is the 7th command. But also if you are not Christian, it's not wrong to use your brain.

[Notafront4adragon]

29 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

It's a myth that a well organized society requires taxation. Even poor people could afford to pay for their own security if there was no poverty creating government. The alternative is called private law society, look up Hans Herman Hoppe. Admittedly, it wouldn't work in a multicultural society though.

With all my donations to make the UK a better place, I could probably have bought 50% extra gold coins. In a private law society many more people would pay much more for good causes, because most people would be better off, particularly the poor.

Any Christ must rejected any government. It's in the Bible, Satan rules the world, that means governments do. And of course, there is the 7th command. But also if you are not Christian, it's not wrong to use your brain.

Hoppe believes that thinks Latinos are less intelligent. A man who claims homosexuals should be excluded from society. I think I understand your view on the world. Suffice to say we shall not be agreeing. 

What's adultery got to do with gold or the government? 

You also seem to want to forget other passages in the bible about wealth and paying your way. Matthew 22:21

[silenceissilver]

28 minutes ago, Notafront4adragon said:

Hoppe believes that thinks Latinos are less intelligent. A man who claims homosexuals should be excluded from society. I think I understand your view on the world. Suffice to say we shall not be agreeing. 

What's adultery got to do with gold or the government? 

You also seem to want to forget other passages in the bible about wealth and paying your way. Matthew 22:21

Can you please provide the source for your claims about Hoppe, e.g. that he suggests that homosexuals should be excluded from society? I think you made this up.

The pro government parts were probably selected into the Bible by the institutionalised church who also translated and interpreted them. Why would they do it in one case and not the other one? Because in one case they had a motive but not in the other one. 

In any case there is the 7th command.

[Notafront4adragon]

17 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

Can you please provide the source for your claims about Hoppe, e.g. that he suggests that homosexuals should be excluded from society? I think you made this up.

He said himself in Democracy: The God That Failed. Homosexuals and political dissidents should be forcefully removed from his covenant communities he advocates for.

So you only want to read the parts of the Bible that confirm your held beliefs and all the other parts are made up? How do you know which parts are put there by the government and which are Christ's words?  

Once again, what do you mean about 7th commandment? Or are you just being cryptic?

[silenceissilver]

41 minutes ago, Notafront4adragon said:

He said himself in Democracy: The God That Failed. Homosexuals and political dissidents should be forcefully removed from his covenant communities he advocates for.

So you only want to read the parts of the Bible that confirm your held beliefs and all the other parts are made up? How do you know which parts are put there by the government and which are Christ's words?  

Once again, what do you mean about 7th commandment? Or are you just being cryptic?

Hoppe said he thought private armies would not employ women or homosexuals as soldiers. He didn't say homosexuals should be excluded from society.

The answer for the rest of your questions, I answered already.

Given the number of your replies, you are lacking focus. 

[Notafront4adragon]

22 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

Hoppe said he thought private armies would not employ women or homosexuals as soldiers. He didn't say homosexuals should be excluded from society.

The answer for the rest of your questions, I answered already.

Given the number of your replies, you are lacking focus. 

He may of said that too, which is also myopic what prevents a woman or a homosexual man from not serving as soldiers?! But he does also say homosexuals should be excluded from his society. I'm not making it up. An extract from his book.

 

[KDave]

16 minutes ago, Notafront4adragon said:

He may said that too. But he does say homosexuals should be excluded from his society. Page 218 of democracy the God that failed 

Very interesting. 

"The advocates of alternative non-family and kin-centered lifestyles" - the opposite being family and kin centred lifestyles. There are many meanings that can be applied to this. I read "not conforming to norms of a society for the purpose of raising children." In other words, those who are not in the business of advancing and continuation of a value sharing society should get out. I am inclined to agree.

By not making outcasts of those not willing to follow societal norms, societal norms have disappeared, isolation and exclusion is now normality. The biggest killer of men under 50 today is suicide, coincidence? I think this guy has nailed it, "the current state of moral degeneracy, social disintegration and cultural rot is the result of too much tolerance" - spot on. When did he write this? 

Democracy has failed in my opinion. It was always doomed to fail, in a pure democracy, human nature/self interest is not harnessed, the positives of human nature as well as the negatives are preyed upon to achieve power. There are better systems but they depend on the measurement by which you judge social success. 

[Melon]

I do find it a tad amusing to see people so strongly expressing their views as solutions.

Reality check, none of us (myself included) are qualified to redefine how mankind operates. The system we have, however flawed, is a result of thousands of years of society evolving. It'll continue to evolve and change, but not because a bunch of blokes on an internet forum want to argue about the law around treasure! 🤣

 

[silenceissilver]

7 hours ago, Notafront4adragon said:

He may of said that too, which is also myopic what prevents a woman or a homosexual man from not serving as soldiers?! But he does also say homosexuals should be excluded from his society. I'm not making it up. An extract from his book.

 

Unfortunately you are getting in wrong again. You are not a careful reader. He doesn't talk about removing them from civilization but from private communities that share conservative values. "Convenant" gives you the hint. And "libertarian society". In his model people were free to set up a communist community as well and some would do this although it would be very short-lived. In his approach everyone can set up their own community and decide who gets in or not and here he describes the type of community he wants to live in. About why women shouldn't be soldiers read Martin Van Creveld - basically because it brings in a dynamic that make armies less efficient. Of course if you don't care about winning a war, then it doesn't matter.

[silenceissilver]

7 hours ago, KDave said:

When did he write this?

In 2003

5 hours ago, Melon said:

It'll continue to evolve and change, but not because a bunch of blokes on an internet forum want to argue about the law around treasure! 

 

Lol, so true, sorry for capturing this thread, I just couldn't leave some comments uncommented.

[Notafront4adragon]

42 minutes ago, silenceissilver said:

Unfortunately you are getting in wrong again. You are not a careful reader. He doesn't talk about removing them from civilization but from private communities that share conservative values. "Convenant" gives you the hint. And "libertarian society". In his model people were free to set up a communist community as well and some would do this although it would be very short-lived. In his approach everyone can set up their own community and decide who gets in or not and here he describes the type of community he wants to live in. About why women shouldn't be soldiers read Martin Van Creveld - basically because it brings in a dynamic that make armies less efficient. Of course if you don't care about winning a war, then it doesn't matter.

Well by all means crack on setting up that society then. Until then pay your taxes.

[KDave]

12 hours ago, Melon said:

I do find it a tad amusing to see people so strongly expressing their views as solutions.

Reality check, none of us (myself included) are qualified to redefine how mankind operates. The system we have, however flawed, is a result of thousands of years of society evolving. It'll continue to evolve and change, but not because a bunch of blokes on an internet forum want to argue about the law around treasure! 🤣

 

Only part true, none of us here will make a direct difference certainly not only by discussion here. But thousands of years to change society by the qualified? I disagree on both points, 'qualified' is not an accurate view of history at all. How quickly has society changed in the last 50 years? In my lifetime things have changed beyond reason and recognition in parts. 

[Fastnick]

Very true, @KDave - I'm sure that we have seen a greater number of things change (and at a greater/faster rate of change) in the last 50 years or so, than at any other similar period of time previously in history

[Melon]

9 hours ago, KDave said:

Only part true, none of us here will make a direct difference certainly not only by discussion here. But thousands of years to change society by the qualified? I disagree on both points, 'qualified' is not an accurate view of history at all. How quickly has society changed in the last 50 years? In my lifetime things have changed beyond reason and recognition in parts. 

I actually agree with you on both points you make. I just think my words were misinterpreted. 

Society is a result of thousands of years of evolution as I said. That doesn't mean it isn't ever changing, and I agree the pace of change has increased. Clearly today's society and the society of the days of the Roman empire look very different for example, but you can see how the evolution of one led to the other, despite there being many transient states of society inbetween. The point being, and this speaks to your second point as well, none of us are qualified to arbitrarily rewrite how society should look in absolutes. It's an evolution involving millions of people over thousands of years to get us to this point, and I suspect it'll continue to evolve in the same fashion short of any drastic global events. 

[KDave]

How long does evolution take. Society might change, but the human being doesn't change much if at all over the past few thousand years. There are clear attributes. In living a life, there are ways of living that are good, those took thousands of years to figure out under the parameters of human nature. States of being if you will. And there are States of being that are bad, these also took thousands of years to figure out. When society says that every state of being is good, from sexual outliers (LGBT lifestyles) to parasitism - why do we expect it to lead a positive outcome. We should expect the opposite, because this shut has been tried before. 

[Melon]

5 hours ago, KDave said:

How long does evolution take. Society might change, but the human being doesn't change much if at all over the past few thousand years. There are clear attributes. In living a life, there are ways of living that are good, those took thousands of years to figure out under the parameters of human nature. States of being if you will. And there are States of being that are bad, these also took thousands of years to figure out. When society says that every state of being is good, from sexual outliers (LGBT lifestyles) to parasitism - why do we expect it to lead a positive outcome. We should expect the opposite, because this shut has been tried before. 

Interesting question. I'd say by definition evolution is gradual change rather than sudden step-change, but it doesn't have to be slow. Usually of course people think of biological evolution which clearly is a very slow process over thousands if not millions of years! 😲

As for the LGBT example, I see no harm in it myself. It's not like we're desperately in need of population growth. If it doesn't harm myself or others, then I struggle to see what concern it is of mine. I guess the caveat would be around things like gender dysphoria which is a medical concern and is linked to shockingly high depression and suicide rates. 

[Guest]

On 22/11/2019 at 16:35, Notafront4adragon said:

Not sure where the idea of 50% has come from the state doesn't keep 50%. It can keep it all. You have no right over treasure as the finder but you almost always get paid the full valuation. Perhaps because those that found treasure previously split the reward with the land owners? 

The process is it's offered to museums etc and you get the value as a reward or if no museums want to bid then you keep it. If it's less than 300yrs old you get to keep it right away. Unless you're in Scotland. 

With this case they didn't even have permission from the landowner and they effectively stole something important from the nation, our heritage, by attempting to sell it illegally hence the strong sentence. 

Not sure if the sentence is excessive or rather the other crimes you mention are too light. I do know the law is very concerned with protecting property.

Perhaps we should all just renounce property and we can all share all resources equally? Didn't think so. So we'll have to stick to the law for now. 

 

This above

I was kind of thinking it was a bit harsh at first and such, but they just took it from the property owner and didn't report it and such. I know nothing about UK law, but I'd hate to lose out on some treasure in my yard alone. People say it's too long of a sentence and I agree, but if it were on my property I would not want to miss out on that find alone.

[Notafront4adragon]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/hoard-silver-coins-sold-auction-123632627.html

Once again the correct way to handle metal finds.

And again no the state doesn't keep half. In fact as per the law, the claim was given up by a museum and now an auction will determine it's value. And once again split 50:50 with the landowner and discoverer. NOT THE STATE!!

[KDave]

4 hours ago, Melon said:

Interesting question. I'd say by definition evolution is gradual change rather than sudden step-change, but it doesn't have to be slow. Usually of course people think of biological evolution which clearly is a very slow process over thousands if not millions of years! 😲

As for the LGBT example, I see no harm in it myself. It's not like we're desperately in need of population growth. If it doesn't harm myself or others, then I struggle to see what concern it is of mine. I guess the caveat would be around things like gender dysphoria which is a medical concern and is linked to shockingly high depression and suicide rates. 

White British have a sub replacement birthrate of 1.8 children per couple, I'd say we are in need of native population growth. Population growth from immigration is agree we don't need any more. 

You have made my point, shockingly high suicide rates in LGBT - clearly this is not a good state of being, so why then are we encouraging our populace and our children to accept it as normal. Why do we tell people such a way of life is normal? Ive nothing against them if people want it, but we shouldn't be promoting it. 

[tallyhojim]

50 minutes ago, KDave said:

White British have a sub replacement birthrate of 1.8 children per couple, I'd say we are in need of native population growth. Population growth from immigration is agree we don't need any more. 

You have made my point, shockingly high suicide rates in LGBT - clearly this is not a good state of being, so why then are we encouraging our populace and our children to accept it as normal. Why do we tell people such a way of life is normal? Ive nothing against them if people want it, but we shouldn't be promoting it. 

Simples - the more the Left can destroy the family unit via divide and conquer, the greater the Left's control of those who then find themselves alone and family-less.

[Melon]

2 hours ago, KDave said:

White British have a sub replacement birthrate of 1.8 children per couple, I'd say we are in need of native population growth. Population growth from immigration is agree we don't need any more. 

You have made my point, shockingly high suicide rates in LGBT - clearly this is not a good state of being, so why then are we encouraging our populace and our children to accept it as normal. Why do we tell people such a way of life is normal? Ive nothing against them if people want it, but we shouldn't be promoting it. 

Seems our viewpoints are farther apart than I thought. I think if you view people as humans rather than grouping people as whites / immigrants / LGBT etc, things become a lot clearer. 

For context, the suicide rate point applied specifically to gender dysphoria, which impacts a relatively tiny sub-population with LGBT. 

[Roy]

8 minutes ago, Melon said:

I think if you view people as humans rather than grouping people as whites / immigrants / LGBT etc, things become a lot clearer. 

Do we have a choice?

[kimchi]

8 minutes ago, Melon said:

Seems our viewpoints are farther apart than I thought. I think if you view people as humans rather than grouping people as whites / immigrants / LGBT etc, things become a lot clearer. 

For context, the suicide rate point applied specifically to gender dysphoria, which impacts a relatively tiny sub-population with LGBT. 

Which sub-population does it affect do you think?

[Notafront4adragon]

2 hours ago, KDave said:

You have made my point, shockingly high suicide rates....- clearly this is not a good state of being, 

By this logic then being a white male under 40 is the not good state of being. 

Suicide accounts for the most deaths of men, gay or otherwise, under 40. Also white men are represent more than 3/4 of those deaths. 

So yeah I guess we should not promote being a white man as a good state of being. It's clearly wrong.