Hannibal,

Do you have a separate place where you keep the aged meat or do you keep it in your house?

I cant keep it for more than a week in the fridge because of the smell.

Scientific stuff, reason or logic will not help if he thinks the way he does.

All you can do is prepare a stake tartar and say that restaurants serve this too because it's the safe way to eat it. Case closed.

... This is where my anger stems from, no matter who you are or what you believe in you just can run against the type of machine that is in place, and expect to be effective, there are forces greater than the heart of the people at play.

I think this is actually the wrong attitude to have, because being angry about something only consumes your energy in vain. Not really productive.

There IS something you can do right now and that is to live with moral integrity. This also means to stop associating with people that have self contradictory beliefs which do not agree with the non-aggression principle. Ask them, face to face: "Do you support the use of violence against me if I choose not to pay takes to support a war/law x,y,z, etc?". If enough people will start doing that, the concept of a state will become history. The state is just an effect of people's willingness to attack each other ("divide et impera" comes to mind).

The real progress begins on the personal level and nobody is going to do that for you.

I am pretty certain that some of my raw horsemeat in Italy was responsible as that was most of what I ate there as regards raw animal foods.

Maybe your eating a large amount of meat at a time could also contribute to that.

I remember Aajonus was talking about the parasites being needed for cavemen because they ate more rarely and they ate a lot in one sitting. They would aid with digestion.

Of course, if they spread too much it can be unpleasant. Have you tried eating garlic/onion/horseradish?

In addition, both studies found similarities between the dino sample and the bone collagen of chickens, providing molecular support for the hypothesis that modern birds are descended from dinosaurs.

You mean dinos would taste like chicken?

You also have to mention that you read the books.

That group is kind of passive in the last months, but it's a good resource if you want to search for various tips that people posted in the past.

Watch this video where Stef explains why one cant limit the power of the state by using politics. He thinks libertarianism will be achieved when future generations will wake up more and more to be able to recognize how immoral it is to have a state. Maybe paleo diet can speed things up a little by providing healthier brains.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McNo62gpw6M

If (planets being aligned) Ron gets elected, he can:
 - Cave in and ignore his campaign statements (same old, same old)
 - Follow his agenda to limit gov starting a massive riot because it would step on many toes (with people wrongly concluding that libertarianism = chaos when things return to "normal")
 - Somehow, magically, manages to overcome any obstacle and implement his plan (everyone is happy and pink pinnies jump around with joy, or not!)

Which one of these is more likely to happen?

KD,

It seems that you would rather play along with the current system and are not interested in rational arguments. It is than pointless for us to debate about libertarianism.

And, to stay on topic, let us know your ideas on how to improve human society (if you believe that it's on an adequate structure) or how to create a better one.

...
I was hoping to see more people actually commint on the zeitgeist movie I think that you should watch it major M an KD, If you really want to understand the true magnitude of some of the most profound Revelations in the world. I watched it a year ago and it set my mind free, at first I began to tell everyone about the issues the movie brings to light, but eventually discovered that people don't want to know how terrible the whole thing is( the turning away)[\b]
...

I think people already know but they are more comfortable living the illusion that they are actually free. It is too painful to admit it and, if they are relatively sane, they have spent their entire mental development period accepting or painting nice contradictory beliefs that allows them to live with it.

Now, here is what are the best possibilities/alternatives, in my opinion (presented in my own words as KD suggested):

1. A system of government where taxation is replaced by donations.
2. A voluntary society where property/money do not exist and people share the resources.
3. A libertarian society, based on the non-aggression principal, were property/money exists and people are only following rules/contracts that they personally agreed with.

I think the absolute best society would be the 3rd option because that would allow for competition to regulate markets, to maximize human's potential for creativity in solving complex social or economic problems. In short it would allow the maximum progress that humanity could achieve and it would create an environment where humans are motivated to express their creativity for good purposes.

The problems that I see with other concepts of society are the following:

For the government one, the very fact that giving a small group of people the power to control weapons and to give laws is like asking for trouble. The great progress with taxation being replaced by donations would come from the fact that the people would simply choose not to pay if government would pass ridiculous laws that people do not agree with.

At this moment I think this could be a way to transition to libertarianism, therefore supporting people who have the intention to minimize government's power and give more freedom of choice to people sounds like a good idea. I'm not convinced that R. Paul would be a good representative for that, but even if he is supporting a constitution (which is in fact a piece of paper) it seems like a better idea to endorse him if he is willing to reduce all laws to that paper. I'm not saying to endorse such a person from a moral perspective, of course, but from a "less evil" one.

As for the voluntary, common property society idea (which I believe the zeitgeist movie is promoting), it sounds good too. The only flaw would be that people are not really that motivated for progress in such an environment since there is no notion of property and competition would be pretty much pointless. I believe that humans are more motivated by the possibility to conquer/hunt for something intellectual or physical and this kind of society would not provide a valid way to address that basic need.

There is also a logical contradiction in this society. Do you see what is it? If not, can you share your kidney with me? You don't own it, after all.


PS: My current libertarian thinking trend is not new. I was never interested in politics or agreed that taxation is ok. I always viewed politicians as a bunch of notorious liars (which is what they are), but I did not think about possible solutions, until recently.

KD,

You actually believe that proposing "a functional system of government that would serve as a replacement" would work? Libertarianism proposes no government because a government is just immoral.

I tried to read your constitution but just could not go further than the part about taxation. I think no constitution is better. How can some dudes locked in a room think they have the moral right to steal from everybody by just writing it on a piece of paper and putting some lipstick on the pig by calling it taxation. Seriously, if you don't believe that taxation is stealing than I would like to know your definition of stealing.

I still recommend you actually get informed about libertarianism before you say it's naive. This is also because I don't want to write pages after pages to explain libertarianism to you. Maybe I will, but right now Champions League is starting lol.

And, pioneer, I did not have time to check those videos yet but I will say this: the fact that Stef seems arrogant or English to you is just a statement of personal preference and not a valid rational argument against his ideas. It's his ideas and moral integrity that I'm interested in actually.

Do you guys realize that raw paleo diet will be the next big thing?

All those raw vegan gurus will become raw paleo dieters.

I'd like to see that happening, but that would mean to have them admit that something they fought for with such passion is just wrong. Few people can do that.

Interesting. I wonder if AV is registered here too?

Ok, I confess, I'm AV and I came to teach you the wonders of raw dairy. 

I imagine he has at least checked out this forum as a guest if he spends as much time on his computer as he claims.

I think the best chance you have to make something happening quick is to run an add in your local area to all people interested in joining for a co-op.

You can tout the health benefits of organic farming, but do not mention raw paleo (until maybe later) as that could scare most people away.