5 ms·

I disagree, it is not something real or tangible. I'm all for defunding NSA, but it's not like a regular business which you can boycott by not giving them money

I disagree, it is not something real or tangible. I'm all for defunding NSA, but it's not like a regular business which you can boycott by not giving them money. You have to go and ask permission from the government to not give the money (which they previously extracted from you by force for the "good of society") to some of the government agencies. It's pretty much like going to NSA itself and ask them to defund themselves. Voting is just a suggestion, it's not binding. Presidential candidates promise stuff, get votes and then are not obliged to deliver what was promised. It works the same way in every country today. Real and tangible way to defund NSA is this: 1. Withhold your taxes. 2. Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). 3. Switch from using US Dollar as most of the money government generates comes from inflation (gov sells "bonds" that it will never repay in exchange for new money). Since all national currencies are inflationary and controlled by similar institutions all over the world, only Bitcoin is a good alternative. Or gold, if we can protect the vaults properly and build trust in a company that keeps it (but history shows it doesn't work). 4. Pay only what you think is fair and where you think it's fair. E.g. if you like social security, pay there directly as much as you want. Only voluntary payments will guarantee that people who you don't like get as much money as someone is willing to give them explicitly and voluntarily. You should not ask for permission to not participate in what you don't approve.

falk 13y ago
I found this Wikipedia article on tax resistance to be full of interesting information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_resistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_resistance
MisterWebz 13y ago
Why wouldn't a boycott work? Instead of signing petitions that won't change a thing, try something that actually requires some real effort and look for alternatives to the current tech giants. For starters, stop using Facebook (gasp). When they realize that cooperating with the NSA will severely damage their reputation, they'll think twice before handing over user data this easily. Not to mention that if they realize their users are migrating, they might start lobbying against the NSA.
- oleganza 13y ago
  Boycotting government is what I was talking about. The problem is to protect yourself and your property against coercion. No one "cooperates" with NSA. Companies would have their bank accounts and other property seized if they don't obey orders. Even if some court later decides to return their property, company would already be fatally harmed. If you want to continue your business, you must comply.
- codyb 13y ago
  This seems to be spot on. As unorganized individuals (or even somewhat organized individuals) it will be much harder for us to protest the actions of the government then if we had some billion dollar companies' corporate lobbyists out there every day talking to the actual senators on our behalf. "We're losing money here, we really need you to vote like this and then we can give you a ton of money for your next campaign. If not, well, we'll fund that other guy and he'll get a bunch of rave press and you'll get a bunch of attack ads during the next election, what do you say Senator?"
chernevik 13y ago
If you make this a choice between the surveillance super state and anarchy, you'll get the super state. Everyone knows we need some kind of government. It's definitely hard to imagine the NSA being defunded, but that is rooted in a culture that is less concerned with government compliance with law and more with "reasonable" outcomes. The inability to control institutions, and the establishment of those institutions as powers in their own right, is the logical consequence.
- BCM43 13y ago
  Everyone knows we need some kind of government. That depends on either your definition of government or everyone.
- snitko 13y ago
  Everyone knows we need some kind of government I don't. Many people I know don't either. So what if we don't really need any kind of government?
  - krapp 13y ago
    I think that we would still have governments because organizing into collectives to assert power and control resources is inevitable as long as inequalities between people and scarcity of resources exist.
  - positr0n 13y ago
    I hear Somalia is nice this time of year.
    - oleganza 13y ago
      So violence in Somalia is not acceptable to you, but allowing your government a lot of violence is acceptable? If people in Somalia cannot find out a way to avoid violence it does not mean it's not possible in principle, or that government is somehow "good".
      - 13y ago
king_jester 13y ago
> 1. Withhold your taxes. > 2. Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). > 3. Switch from using US Dollar as most of the money government generates comes from inflation (gov sells "bonds" that it will never repay in exchange for new money). Since all national currencies are inflationary and controlled by similar institutions all over the world, only Bitcoin is a good alternative. Or gold, if we can protect the vaults properly and build trust in a company that keeps it (but history shows it doesn't work). > 4. Pay only what you think is fair and where you think it's fair. E.g. if you like social security, pay there directly as much as you want. So the solution of breaking free from the NSA and problems of US gov't is to isolate yourself and recreate the exact same systems in miniature?
- oleganza 13y ago
  Government != society. By not allowing any excuse for violence (including self-defence) and seeking voluntary arrangement with people around you to protect yourselves you are not isolating yourself. On contrary, you solve the social problem socially, not brutally like today with government.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    Wait, you intend to take away my right to defend myself too? Fuck that, me being defenseless ended circa high school. Never again.
    - oleganza 13y ago
      You don't have any rights. These are just unproven words or bribes given to you by the people with power. Of course, you'd have to protect yourself when attacked, no question about it. But it's not a moral choice, it's an extreme case where you don't have any choice. So I'm not going to prove any libertarian rights platform based on right to self-defense. Without government, rights will appear in a form of voluntary agreement in parts of society on what's acceptable and what's not. E.g. if in Texas it's acceptable to kill trespassers without asking question, then so be it. I don't like this rule, so I'd just avoid being in Texas. But neither my opinion, nor cowboy's opinion create any globally applicable rights. I just don't want some mafia to take over people living in Texas and dictate them what they can or cannot do. They'd better decide themselves and smoothly adjust as new people arrive or get born there.
ceejayoz 13y ago
> Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). Yeah, that's not going to happen. "Protect yourself" in this case translates to "ensure your rapid death in a SWAT assault". Security guards aren't going to fight a warrant for your arrest, and mercenaries will just die in the assault.
darkarmani 13y ago
> most of the money government generates comes from inflation I don't believe this. And if it is true then witholding your taxes won't help. The people losing money to inflation would probably stop buying bonds if inflation ate into their returns.
rdl 13y ago
The principled/safe way to withhold your taxes is to just not generate much income.

falk 13y ago

I found this Wikipedia article on tax resistance to be full of interesting information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_resistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_resistance

MisterWebz 13y ago

Why wouldn't a boycott work? Instead of signing petitions that won't change a thing, try something that actually requires some real effort and look for alternatives to the current tech giants. For starters, stop using Facebook (gasp). When they realize that cooperating with the NSA will severely damage their reputation, they'll think twice before handing over user data this easily. Not to mention that if they realize their users are migrating, they might start lobbying against the NSA.

oleganza 13y ago
Boycotting government is what I was talking about. The problem is to protect yourself and your property against coercion. No one "cooperates" with NSA. Companies would have their bank accounts and other property seized if they don't obey orders. Even if some court later decides to return their property, company would already be fatally harmed. If you want to continue your business, you must comply.
codyb 13y ago
This seems to be spot on. As unorganized individuals (or even somewhat organized individuals) it will be much harder for us to protest the actions of the government then if we had some billion dollar companies' corporate lobbyists out there every day talking to the actual senators on our behalf. "We're losing money here, we really need you to vote like this and then we can give you a ton of money for your next campaign. If not, well, we'll fund that other guy and he'll get a bunch of rave press and you'll get a bunch of attack ads during the next election, what do you say Senator?"

chernevik 13y ago

If you make this a choice between the surveillance super state and anarchy, you'll get the super state. Everyone knows we need some kind of government. It's definitely hard to imagine the NSA being defunded, but that is rooted in a culture that is less concerned with government compliance with law and more with "reasonable" outcomes. The inability to control institutions, and the establishment of those institutions as powers in their own right, is the logical consequence.

BCM43 13y ago
Everyone knows we need some kind of government. That depends on either your definition of government or everyone.
snitko 13y ago
Everyone knows we need some kind of government I don't. Many people I know don't either. So what if we don't really need any kind of government?
- krapp 13y ago
  I think that we would still have governments because organizing into collectives to assert power and control resources is inevitable as long as inequalities between people and scarcity of resources exist.
- positr0n 13y ago
  I hear Somalia is nice this time of year.
  - oleganza 13y ago
    So violence in Somalia is not acceptable to you, but allowing your government a lot of violence is acceptable? If people in Somalia cannot find out a way to avoid violence it does not mean it's not possible in principle, or that government is somehow "good".
    - 13y ago

king_jester 13y ago

> 1. Withhold your taxes. > 2. Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). > 3. Switch from using US Dollar as most of the money government generates comes from inflation (gov sells "bonds" that it will never repay in exchange for new money). Since all national currencies are inflationary and controlled by similar institutions all over the world, only Bitcoin is a good alternative. Or gold, if we can protect the vaults properly and build trust in a company that keeps it (but history shows it doesn't work). > 4. Pay only what you think is fair and where you think it's fair. E.g. if you like social security, pay there directly as much as you want. So the solution of breaking free from the NSA and problems of US gov't is to isolate yourself and recreate the exact same systems in miniature?

oleganza 13y ago
Government != society. By not allowing any excuse for violence (including self-defence) and seeking voluntary arrangement with people around you to protect yourselves you are not isolating yourself. On contrary, you solve the social problem socially, not brutally like today with government.
- mpyne 13y ago
  Wait, you intend to take away my right to defend myself too? Fuck that, me being defenseless ended circa high school. Never again.
  - oleganza 13y ago
    You don't have any rights. These are just unproven words or bribes given to you by the people with power. Of course, you'd have to protect yourself when attacked, no question about it. But it's not a moral choice, it's an extreme case where you don't have any choice. So I'm not going to prove any libertarian rights platform based on right to self-defense. Without government, rights will appear in a form of voluntary agreement in parts of society on what's acceptable and what's not. E.g. if in Texas it's acceptable to kill trespassers without asking question, then so be it. I don't like this rule, so I'd just avoid being in Texas. But neither my opinion, nor cowboy's opinion create any globally applicable rights. I just don't want some mafia to take over people living in Texas and dictate them what they can or cannot do. They'd better decide themselves and smoothly adjust as new people arrive or get born there.

ceejayoz 13y ago

> Protect yourself against the police and the military who will try to extract them by force (possibly by having crowdfunded guards). Yeah, that's not going to happen. "Protect yourself" in this case translates to "ensure your rapid death in a SWAT assault". Security guards aren't going to fight a warrant for your arrest, and mercenaries will just die in the assault.

darkarmani 13y ago

> most of the money government generates comes from inflation I don't believe this. And if it is true then witholding your taxes won't help. The people losing money to inflation would probably stop buying bonds if inflation ate into their returns.

rdl 13y ago

The principled/safe way to withhold your taxes is to just not generate much income.