Re: Prove My Existence Within A (GeoPolitical) State

by **JIGL0JAY** 19/7/2013, 9:18 am

Nemo wrote:I think the best answer would be that it is impossible before we get the ultimate knowledge which would mean us knowing how we were created, how the earth was created, how the universe was created.

I guess we'll never reach "ultimate knowledge" if ignorant people like you, who don't even take a moment to read the thread, continue to exist.

Nemo wrote:Knowing that universe is almost if not infinite, it is impossible for me to prove such thing.

You can't prove my existence within boundaries arbitrarily assigned... because the universe is almost infinite? I don't understand your train of thought here.

Nemo wrote:I mean I can prove myself that I am alive because at the moment I am moving, breathing, etc but I do not even know what the fuck I am doing in this world.

Not relevant, at all. Oh wait, I know where you're going with this.

Nemo wrote:In fact I have never been in any other person then me so it is impossible for me to prove that you guys exist.

Yep, there it is. You didn't read the thread.

And this thread is not an effort in pointlessness if I have to keep repeating myself. There are many arguments to be presented but it is the OTHER posters that do not read therefore it is the OTHER posters fault that this thread repeats itself, despite the fact that I have changed both the original post as well as the title to try to shift the conversation.

by **Blackyy** 19/7/2013, 6:24 pm

I did w/e

by **JIGL0JAY** 19/7/2013, 6:41 pm

Nemo wrote:but I did w/e, not everyone has english as first language.

If you read the thread, you would realize that I even changed the title to say "geopolitical". If you don't know what geopolitical means, you probably shouldn't be posting here. Because you ignored that and then posted metaphysics that, as I said NUMEROUS times, is not relevant to this discussion at all.

Nemo wrote:If you dont want people to discuss, even if they are wrong or their arguments is not what you are looking for, or is not within the rules, its still a discussion, the world isnt at stake.

So let's say that we're in "Runescape discussion" and someone posts "New armor released in Runescape". What they meant was EoC, but a LOT of people start posting about a new armor in '07 servers. You try to change the topic back and even change the title to "EoC Runescape" but people continue to use "New Armor" as the discussion. I think the OP would have every right to be pissed that people aren't paying attention to the actual topic. So no, what you're doing is being off topic and I don't think your opinion holds any weight in this thread.

Nemo wrote:+who are you to call people ignorant.

You must not know who I am.

I am the OP. I am the guy who is asking the questions. I am the one who wants the answer. I can call you ignorant because you are so cocksure about your post that you stand behind it despite being told it doesn't even remotely answer the question. I'd throw a dictionary at you but I'm getting the feeling you probably don't even know what ignorant means.

Nemo wrote:I understood something, you understood something else, thats why this world is so messed up and that is why wars and arguments wont probably end.

Prove My Existence Within A (GeoPolitical) State - Page 4 Missed10

Nemo wrote:keep ur thread up, maybe ull find jiglojay 2 and you two will discuss about life and enjoy.

"Wow guys, I couldn't post an actual argument so maybe I should try to insult him about his love life, maybe that will make my post totally correct!"

http://www.smokinelite.com/t62300-read-this-debating-reference-guide

by **Blak_Flames** 30/7/2013, 4:56 am

I think I can help ya, what state is your driver's license issued from?

by **JIGL0JAY** 30/7/2013, 7:30 am

Blak_Flames wrote:I think I can help ya, what state is your driver's license issued from?

You prove your own ignorance by posting such stupidity on my thread.

JIGL0JAY wrote:
JohnieQuest wrote:This is easy lol.
Broeder wrote:He has a point^
Actually no. The point is being made that I am located there. That's not proving my existence within it. That's proving that I am located there. Two different concepts.

by **Blak_Flames** 30/7/2013, 11:13 am

JIGL0JAY wrote:
Blak_Flames wrote:I think I can help ya, what state is your driver's license issued from?

You prove your own ignorance by posting such stupidity on my thread.

JIGL0JAY wrote:
JohnieQuest wrote:This is easy lol.
Broeder wrote:He has a point^
Actually no. The point is being made that I am located there. That's not proving my existence within it. That's proving that I am located there. Two different concepts.

My ignorance? That's funny, you expect me to look at a poorly drawn map in MS Paint, not even drawn by you, and use that as a reference to where you live? So, I'm guessing Iowa, or South Dakota? Hell, I don't know. I did have a train of thought concerning the question I asked you. But since you'd rather belittle me, I won't even bother. I haven't the time to play around with pompous people on the internet.

by **Muffins** 31/7/2013, 2:18 pm

Blak_Flames wrote:
JIGL0JAY wrote:
Blak_Flames wrote:I think I can help ya, what state is your driver's license issued from?

You prove your own ignorance by posting such stupidity on my thread.

JIGL0JAY wrote:
JohnieQuest wrote:This is easy lol.
Broeder wrote:He has a point^
Actually no. The point is being made that I am located there. That's not proving my existence within it. That's proving that I am located there. Two different concepts.

My ignorance? That's funny, you expect me to look at a poorly drawn map in MS Paint, not even drawn by you, and use that as a reference to where you live? So, I'm guessing Iowa, or South Dakota? Hell, I don't know. I did have a train of thought concerning the question I asked you. But since you'd rather belittle me, I won't even bother. I haven't the time to play around with pompous people on the internet.

by **JIGL0JAY** 31/7/2013, 5:07 pm

Blak_Flames wrote:My ignorance? That's funny, you expect me to look at a poorly drawn map in MS Paint, not even drawn by you, and use that as a reference to where you live? So, I'm guessing Iowa, or South Dakota? Hell, I don't know. I did have a train of thought concerning the question I asked you. But since you'd rather belittle me, I won't even bother. I haven't the time to play around with pompous people on the internet.

Where would you go with such a pompous question, though. "Oh look, he lives in Hawaii, that proves he lives within a state!"

After I answered that I lived in Hawaii but my License said California, you would realize that you're looking at "state" as in "part of the United States" (putting words in your mouth since why the hell else would you ask "what state are you in").
And then you realize that I believe that the arbitrary boundaries for "states" are simply that: arbitrary
And then you realize that I don't believe the government has any true merit for claiming the ground as theirs simply because they can because the government is an idea and an idea cannot hold land.

Did you even read my reply to Johnie/Broeder? Was there more to what you were trying to say? Does it legitimately matter what US state I'm in?

by **Blak_Flames** 31/7/2013, 7:32 pm

Muffins: Ironic you posted that picture. It sums up the whole conversation I'm not willing to have with you.

---------------------

Jigl0: How presumptuous of you. I have read the thread, and I'm quite aware of your thoughts of living in a "boundary" as pertaining to the subject at hand. But no, that's not the course of action I was going to take. I'm going to assume you thought it was how I was going to proceed simply due to the fact of how it looks so nonchalant and derisive. Not my intent, but as I said before, there was a thought process behind it. Honestly, it had nothing to do with knowing where you lived. It had to deal with the admission of the question.

So, there's my explanation of such a "pompous" question. Yes, I know it's still vague and it's very likely no one's going to understand what it has to do with your question. That's fine, I'm too offended to elaborate.

I thought this forum was for sharing knowledge, and letting people see more than one side from more than just one point of view. I hadn't realized the intelligent debate forum had equated into a contest of superior intellect since I've been gone.

“It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.”

by **JIGL0JAY** 1/8/2013, 9:03 am

Blak_Flames wrote:I'm going to assume you thought it was how I was going to proceed simply due to the fact of how it looks so nonchalant and derisive. Not my intent, but as I said before, there was a thought process behind it.

Well not only was it pompous but it appeared to fall under the same umbrella of "oh look I just solved your post by completely ignoring your counter points". This was backed up by the fact that it was the only sentence you had.

Blak_Flames wrote:Honestly, it had nothing to do with knowing where you lived. It had to deal with the admission of the question.

Nothing was implied so you basically gave me nothing to go off of. That is why I presumed. Because what matter does what state I live in mean to the question at hand?

Blak_Flames wrote:That's fine, I'm too offended to elaborate.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Blak_Flames wrote:I thought this forum was for sharing knowledge, and letting people see more than one side from more than just one point of view. I hadn't realized the intelligent debate forum had equated into a contest of superior intellect since I've been gone.

The fact that you see my (what appear to be) futile attempts to get on-topic discussion as "contests of superior intellect" baffle me, mostly because you posted a sentence long question with no backing and then expected me to reply to it. I gave you my reply that it didn't matter where I was and countered with "what does where I live matter"?

Answer that question in your next post or I'll just forget you said anything.

by **Muffins** 1/8/2013, 10:42 am

JIGL0JAY wrote:
Blak_Flames wrote:I'm going to assume you thought it was how I was going to proceed simply due to the fact of how it looks so nonchalant and derisive. Not my intent, but as I said before, there was a thought process behind it.

Well not only was it pompous but it appeared to fall under the same umbrella of "oh look I just solved your post by completely ignoring your counter points". This was backed up by the fact that it was the only sentence you had.

Blak_Flames wrote:Honestly, it had nothing to do with knowing where you lived. It had to deal with the admission of the question.
Nothing was implied so you basically gave me nothing to go off of. That is why I presumed. Because what matter does what state I live in mean to the question at hand?

Blak_Flames wrote:That's fine, I'm too offended to elaborate.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Blak_Flames wrote:I thought this forum was for sharing knowledge, and letting people see more than one side from more than just one point of view. I hadn't realized the intelligent debate forum had equated into a contest of superior intellect since I've been gone.
The fact that you see my (what appear to be) futile attempts to get on-topic discussion as "contests of superior intellect" baffle me, mostly because you posted a sentence long question with no backing and then expected me to reply to it. I gave you my reply that it didn't matter where I was and countered with "what does where I live matter"?

Answer that question in your next post or I'll just forget you said anything.

inb4 you're an asshat

by **JIGL0JAY** 1/8/2013, 4:43 pm

Muffins if you have nothing relevant to post, you need to stay off the thread.

by **Blak_Flames** 1/8/2013, 8:41 pm

JIGL0JAY wrote:Well not only was it pompous but it appeared to fall under the same umbrella of "oh look I just solved your post by completely ignoring your counter points". This was backed up by the fact that it was the only sentence you had.

Oh, well, I guess appearances really are deceiving.

JIGL0JAY wrote:Nothing was implied so you basically gave me nothing to go off of. That is why I presumed. Because what matter does what state I live in mean to the question at hand?

You weren't suppose to go off anything. You were only supposed to answer the question. And, in my previous post, I told you the question was more about you admitting you had a driver's license, not about me caring where you lived. Puzzling? Yes, I know. I would have gone in depth with my reasoning had you answered the question, or rather, despite my ignorance.

JIGL0JAY wrote:Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Come onnnn, that's beneath you.

JIGL0JAY wrote:The fact that you see my (what appear to be) futile attempts to get on-topic discussion as "contests of superior intellect" baffle me, mostly because you posted a sentence long question with no backing and then expected me to reply to it. I gave you my reply that it didn't matter where I was and countered with "what does where I live matter"?

It was more of an opinionated statement, but see it how you wish. And yeah, I did expect you to reply to the question with an actual answer. It is your thread though, if you want straight forward answers without all the hassle of providing a little bit of information, so be it. And, no, your first reply pertained to how ignorant I was just because YOU couldn't see any other path the question was taking besides the "arbitrary boundaries" argument and rebuttal.

JIGL0JAY wrote:Answer that question ("what does where I live matter?") in your next post or I'll just forget you said anything.

I answered earlier, but I'll do so again to clarify. It doesn't matter where you live.

Spoiler:

Muffins wrote:inb4 you're an asshat

Are you going for the "Trade with Moron" badge as well? Keep up the good work!

by **JIGL0JAY** 2/8/2013, 12:18 am

Blak_Flames wrote:You weren't suppose to go off anything. You were only supposed to answer the question. And, in my previous post, I told you the question was more about you admitting you had a driver's license, not about me caring where you lived.

I was trying to see if you consentually utilized a state-level governement agency and then transition into the finer points of my argument. And, before you assume anything, no, that wasn't my only premise. Just incase you feel the need to refute it, which would be pointless without "the whole ten yards".

I know I shouldn't be jumping to yet another conclusion but since you did clarify I'll give you a response to this idea as well. The problem with consenting to the state-level government agencies is that the state is ultimately controlled by the federal government. So even if I did consent with Hawaii, California, Washington, etc laws, I am still bound to the federal laws simply by my presence and I feel that is unwarranted.

So to answer your first question: Two driver's licenses from Hawaii and California. Please elaborate your premise and total post so that I don't have to keep assuming things. Unless of course you are going to ask me questions in which case, be my guest.

by **piramatrix** 6/11/2013, 7:50 am

i agree with you whan you say the state is just an idea, a concept everyone mindlessly believes in. in my opinion the state only "exists" because someone say it does and people generally accept it.

i think if you don't believe in the concept of "the state" you cannot exist in it. is it even possible to exist within an idea??

by **JIGL0JAY** 21/11/2013, 9:39 am

piramatrix wrote:i agree with you whan you say the state is just an idea, a concept everyone mindlessly believes in. in my opinion the state only "exists" because someone say it does and people generally accept it.

i think if you don't believe in the concept of "the state" you cannot exist in it. is it even possible to exist within an idea??

Well this is a summary of my posts, yes.

I guess I can let a little slack on this post go and explain the reason behind its existence, if that isn't already known: We were, and are, raised in countries where the existence of government is normal. Now, this is not necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that the boundaries are artificial and people within those boundaries are forced, by simple fact that they reside within the boundaries, to pay portions of their income to an institution (the IRS, etc). If you were to resist this collection, you serve a very massive fine and jail time. This is unavoidable, as most countries take part in tax collections.

One of the big counter points that many people like to propose is "why don't you move somewhere else then?" And this is countered quite easily by making note that every country, outside of a few empty areas of land, has some system of government that requires integrating to. Simply moving is a luxury that not everyone has. So why is it that if I do not want to participate in the government, I have to burden myself to move an entire continent away? The reason for this thread is only to expose the fact that government is a fabrication.

by **JIGL0JAY** 7/10/2014, 6:25 am

by **Broeder** 7/10/2014, 6:30 am

Since it has been a while and I cba reading everything, how do you define "prove"?

by **Music** 7/10/2014, 7:15 am

Not this again...

by **JeeOh** 31/1/2015, 3:08 pm

Can you please expand on what exactly you mean by "Existence within a GeoPolitical State."

Edit: Actually, no need to answer this. I can't prove your existence at all let alone within a GeoPolitical State, nobody can.

by **JIGL0JAY** 1/2/2015, 4:00 am

JeeOh wrote:Can you please expand on what exactly you mean by "Existence within a GeoPolitical State."

Since I explained my reasoning behind this thread on this page and page 6, I'll just elaborate more. I don't know if you'll come back to this thread or not, I suppose I'm just gonna talk out of my ass a little bit.

Basically, the point of the thread was inspired by one that was on a different forum. A lot of the answers were/are verbatim, and while I can't say I 100% back the spirit of the thread, I believe it brings up very important points when discussing politics. The entire perspective of the thread is viewed from an individualistic point of view. Your laws don't apply to me just because you say so or because you say you own the land. It is also a viewpoint of voluntarism, where consent or a contract has to be made in order for actions to proceed. Politics is philosophical theater when you think about it. In everyone's ideal world, their political system works. People who subscribe to individualism, voluntarism, and other types of freedom-based ideologies desire less collective rule due to problem of forcing other people to do things that they would not like to do. While this is not without flaws, it is the point of the post: How is it that one person, two people, a collective of people, can say that they are the owners of land within an arbitrary boundary and that to live within that boundary you are forced to pay a tax to the owners. On top of this, you and I did not ask to be placed within these boundaries, we were simply born into them. The only way to leave this set of boundaries is either to cut one's self off entirely from civilization, or join some other group of people's boundaries. Who defines the boundaries, why do they have the authority, and why am I subjected to that authority if I never consented to it?

by **gunmage8** 1/2/2015, 2:43 pm

I'd like to take a shot on this just want to get some ideas out here. When we are born we don't have real power until we are 18. At least in the us. Our parents actually make the choice for us. Once we are born our parents fill out a lot of paperwork and documents. This includes a birth certificate, social security card, and us passport. So i mean you never really consent to anything its more like your parents consented for you. By signing those papers your parents agree that you will be a us citizen and that you will abide by the laws and unfortunately one of them is paying taxes. Another point i like to bring up is that there is no perfect political system. Everyone thinks that they have the perfect solution (democracy, communism, anarchy) but it never works out for everyone. You also bring up the point of doing two things cutting yourself off from civilization or joining another group of people's boundaries in order to get away. Clearly you wont join another persons boundaries because you would have the same problem there with taxes and authority however a third option here is becoming a dictator. I think that would satisfy your problems. You could say whatever you want and be in charge of yourself and even other people. You can define the boundaries to a point in which another individual would say that's my land and you can either say alright or continue and essentially take it over. You would just have to have the upper hand over others. Which right now would be a bigger stockpile of nuclear weapons.

(pretty sure i just rambled here but it got me thinking a bit thanks Smile

oh and its nice to see you again)

by **JIGL0JAY** 2/2/2015, 3:24 am

gunmage8 wrote:Once we are born our parents fill out a lot of paperwork and documents. This includes a birth certificate, social security card, and us passport. So i mean you never really consent to anything its more like your parents consented for you.

My parents are not me, however. Following this train of thought I could then dismiss these contracts as invalid due to my individual person being of legal capacity and no legal signature from my person being associated with those documents.

gunmage8 wrote:however a third option here is becoming a dictator. I think that would satisfy your problems. You could say whatever you want and be in charge of yourself and even other people. You can define the boundaries to a point in which another individual would say that's my land and you can either say alright or continue and essentially take it over. You would just have to have the upper hand over others. Which right now would be a bigger stockpile of nuclear weapons.

I think you need to scale that idea down a little bit in order to recognize the point being made: "You can say whatever you want and be in charge of yourself" is not a dictatorship but personal autonomy.

When I ask you to prove my existence in a geopolitical state, you say something I've addressed numerous times that doesn't actually touch on the point.

My social security number and birth certificate do not prove my existence in a political state. They don't present an argument at all, and now you're begging the question by assuming the state exists in the first place. Let me elaborate: The bible existing does not mean that God exists because the bible exists, that would mean that it's assumed that the creator exists because a creation of the creator exists. A birth certificate does not mean that the State exists because of the certificates existence.

Just because the government forces my parents to sign contracts assigning me to designations within the state does not mean that I've consented. Ages of consent are arbitrary (ranging throughout the years and through different countries from ages as young as 6 to as old as 18, and 21 in certain cases such as alcohol) and therefore mean only as much to me as the documents that were forced upon me.

by Sponsored content