A nation develops a state to protect its citizens from predation. If a state does so it can at least chalk up a justification for its existence. "Small government" libertarians are predators and wannabe predators who hope people won't notice that freedom of predators from restraint means tyranny for prey. It's not liberty for all that they seek but the sequestering of liberty by and for themselves. The key to getting hold that predatory liberty is to control government policies. Watch it being played out in the Budget arguments and the role of the IPA and like spokespeople for predators.

Jardine K. Jardine
one under god,
I personally think that we are on the brink of a 'mini' world war.
I believe that Israel, mentored by the US, will nuke Iraq and Iran.
The Arab league will rise up against Israel and be wiped out by the superior forces of the Jews and the US.
I think this will galvanize the Islamic cultures into world wide reaction which again will be defeated but not before India nukes Pakistan and Burma.
The direct link between Christianity, energy, munitions and medications via the intermediaries of the "Illuminati" and the world bank will prevail and the population growth of the world will be halted for a century.

Well, nuking those backward Islamic territories would be a good thing for the world. It would keep of lot of those terrorists from getting on boats and coming here to do their dirty work. Thankfully, Abbott and Morrison currently have them under control.

o sung wu,
Did not the Freemason movement come into existence as a rebuttal of the Pharaohs policy of entombing the builders of their tombs, on completion, to prevent outsiders gaining access knowledge to secrets taken to the grave by the Pharaohs?
Would not this movement have been the first "Trade Union"?

Hi there CHRISGAFF1000...

That's indeed an novel description of the origins of Freemasonry ? I never thought of it in that way before, so I suppose you're right essentially.

Many claim Freemasonry had it's genesis at the time of building King Solomon's temple in Mesopotamia. Whereas in reality, the movement of today isn't anywhere near as ancient as that. Freemasonry as we know it only goes back about three hundred years, with most of it's roots emanating in Scotland.

True there's some evidence of it's prior existence in Ireland and France, but I have little knowledge of that personally. Modern freemasonry is of course emblematic or symbolic of the ancient stonemasons who actually worked on King Solomon's temple. And you're quite right when you say they're almost a 'trade union' ! Consequently, because they were considered such elite craftsmen, both by the Kings and rulers of these ancient empires, as well as their own kind, they jealously guarded their secrets (trade secrets) from falling into the hands of those less qualified to carry out their fine works and traditions.

And it's also true, in order to protect those traditions, they devised and possessed many disguised and clandestine ways of communicating, often shrouded in allegory, employing secret words, signs, and symbols, all in order that they could pass safely through foreign and hostile lands, as they travelled throughout the known world, in order to build these great edifices to and for the rulers of these ancient empires.

Therefore, traditionally Freemasons today use a similar system of words and signs, also secret, for the purposes of recognising a fellow mason and provide succour and aid, should he need it. I hope this is of some assistance to you ?

Emperor Julian

"A nation develops a state to protect its citizens from predation."
You provide no evidence for this assertion which has no basis in historical fact.

The reason it's wrong is because "a nation" is not a decision-making entity. You are confusing youself by using an abstract aggregate collective concept to describe millions of people each with different aims. This fact invalidates your entire line of reasoning.

"If a state does so it can at least chalk up a justification for its existence."

Only in so far as it serves to protect its subjects from predation. But a state is by definition a property-expropriating and person-violating protector of person and property. To the extent that a state increases predation, for example stealing from A and giving to B which is what you're advocating, your own argument fails you.

""Small government" libertarians are predators and wannabe predators who hope people won't notice that freedom of predators from restraint means tyranny for prey."

People who engage in, or advocate, consensual transactions are by definition not predators, so it is both dishonest and stupid of you to say they are.

"It's not liberty for all that they seek but the sequestering of liberty by and for themselves."
You give no evidence or reason for this 1. mind-reading, 2. ad hominem, 3, factually false statement.

Thus you have not shown any reason why the violent predation that you advocate is is any different morally from ISIS. All you've done is show that statism can't be defended without descending immediately into fallacies and intellectual dishonesty.