I don't have time to really go through what other people might think, but I haven't posted a new blentry in a long time. I recently more or less addressed this topic in a reply to a friend or 2 on facebook.
Although I don't think most people actually have an understanding of what they mean when they say a representative government. I believe most people claim the government of the USofA and the states, counties and cities within it are representative governments.
What might you mean by "a representative government"?
Here's the tail end of the reply that sparked my response.
...
You and Matt both, dont want people to represent you but in your case you go and protest that you ae not being represented yet you dont want to be. I dont get it. You were there repreenting yourself though, so really you were being represented, I gues its an enigma, wrapped in a riddle.
I also don't have time at the moment to edit my response into a workable blentry, so I'll just paste it as is:
It really isn't an enigma. You have to twist words right out of their meanings to imagine what you are saying.
I don't vote. I don't sanction the system where people can take my stuff and tell me what I can and can't do.
In your system, by definition, you get to tell people what they can and can't do and take their stuff. You get to kill women and children by proxy. And you are allowed to evade the fact that that is what you are doing. But I will never let you get away with that evasion. And I make public statements about it and you can't deny what it is I am saying when I use words that actually maintain their meanings throughout. Meanings that you can look up in a dictionary. Many times I actually include the meaning, so there is no mistake what I am saying.
Please deny this in public with words that maintain their meanings throughout.
Since you claim allegiance to a representative government, whether you want to call it a democracy, a republic, a mobocracy. etc., it is in fact a representative government, then someone represents you.
----
Before I make my statement, I'd like to ask this question (or two). If you choose to vote in the elections, do you consent to be represented by the winner of the election?
Only if you answer yes to that, (if you answer no to that I'd like to hear your reason why?) then answer this, please. If you consent to be represented by another person, is every official act he makes made as your proxy?
If not, why not? And who gets to decide which are and are not acts as your proxy?
Can someone acting as your proxy commit an act you could not commit on your own?
----
You claim that I am represented even if I take two actions, which I take and claim publicly whenever I get the chance.
First, I do not vote. I do not vote, because I can see with my own two eyes and feel in my very heart that people who would claim to act as my proxy if they won the election will engage in acts I would not be able to commit if acting on my own. And there is absolutely nothing I can do to stop it.
So the second act I take is to publicly claim often that no one represents me. No one who tells other people to go to other countries and kill and maim and starve and torture their men, women and children is acting as my proxy. Ever. I renounce those acts as acts of my proxy. Are there any words in there I am mincing, misusing or misdefining? Is my meaning clear? I HAVE NO PROXY!!! No one murders for ME. No one steals for ME. No one tells other people how they can run their business for ME. No one tells others they can't carry a firearm or smoke a joint acting as my proxy. NO ONE!!!!
No one imprisons another person for a crime with no victim acting as my proxy. NO ONE!!!
Do I make myself clear? Is my position sufficiently understood?
Here:
{Main Entry: proxy
Pronunciation: \'präk-se\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural prox·ies
Etymology: Middle English proxi, procucie, contraction of procuracie, from Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin procuratia, alteration of Latin procuratio procuration
Date: 15th century
1 : the agency, function, or office of a deputy who acts as a substitute for another
2 a : authority or power to act for another b : a document giving such authority; specifically : a power of attorney authorizing a specified person to vote corporate stock
3 : a person authorized to act for another : procurator}
See what that says? NO ONE commits acts I would not be able to commit on my own as my proxy.
How many people are willing to publicly make that statement?
(oh, and I just noticed 2.b. -
there is no document authorizing anyone to commit acts as my proxy that I would not be able to commit acting as a sole agent of myself. If someone can present one to me, I would be happy to renounce it on the spot. I do not remember signing any such document. If I did, I didn't understand what I was signing and therefore repeat, I renounce it.)
Let me phrase it this way. Anyone who claims to act as my proxy is, in fact, as of this writing a liar.
Are there any other words I need to define to make myself more clear?
If so, please let me know or look them up yourself.
Okay, so now that I am clear on my position (I hope).
Are people acting as your proxy to murder innocent men, women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan? Can you deny that without using made up excuses like "collateral damage" or "we've got to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here"? I asked a while ago in a few places for people to explain how to tell which ones to kill when you are killing them there (attacking other people in their own country) rather than killing them here (defending yourself). No one can tell me how they know. I guess it's telepathy or something. But I don't know a court in the world that would find a not guilty verdict on the testimony of telepathy.
So they are attacking and murdering them. In your name.
Somehow you have made the claim more than once that they represent me even if I choose not to vote. How can that be? They would only be able to do that by coercing my consent, and you would certainly know when they decide to do that. And I don't think you can call it consent if coercion is involved.
Do people, acting as your proxy, take property from others against their will for carrying a firearm or smoking a joint? Do people, acting as your proxy, accost, kidnap and hold for ransom other people because they carry a firearm or smoke a joint?
They don't in my name. I publicly make that claim.
You know, the internet is a pretty big place. You keep telling me I need to do something rather than sit on my butt and complain. What you take for complaining is me stating my claim. So, I guess you could say I'm claiming. You tell me I should be working for change. I cannot work for change within a system based on force and violence to achieve an end, since what I am working toward is a society where force and violence play no part.
Please don't take that to mean that I am aloof and don't understand that people will still want to initiate violence against me. I realize that. I just don't want them to have the sanction of proxy. I don't want them to be in an exalted position by process of acting as a government agent. I don't want to be prohibited by a show of virtually unlimited force from defending myself or assisting my neighbor to defend himself from someone who would attempt to initiate force against me or him to gain an end that he could not gain without said show of force.
I claim this is something I can do:
I can ask how many other people in the world can claim that no one acts as their proxy when engaging in acts that he would not be able to take acting on his own.
As of the time of this posting, the estimated population is:
U.S. 310,060,127
World 6,864,089,393
I can' t imagine I am 1 in 6,864,089,393, but it is entirely possible.
If enough people, in enough different countries, made the claim that no one has permission to act as their proxy to commit an act that they could not commit acting on their own, then all the wars and taxes would be seen for what they are.
Whadda ya say, Dustin? Do people commit those acts as your proxy?
{Main Entry: be·half
Pronunciation: \bi-'haf, -'häf, be-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from by + half half, side
Date: 14th century
: interest, benefit; also : support, defense
— on behalf of or in behalf of : in the interest of; also : as a representative of}
Do they act in your behalf?
They don't act in my behalf. And I am willingly stating that claim.
