pioneer,

Of course history has proven that over and over again. It is, after all, human nature and probably, to some extent, bad diets.

sabertooth,

I'm not sure it's all like WWE wrestling because some politicians (or interest groups represented by them) actually compete with each other for power, but that's a good comparison in terms of the show off that all have in common.

It is ridiculous and yet, people still hope that "one day" the government will be composed of virtuous and benevolent politicians if they just make the "right" choice on the next election...

I go with how I feel is right in the moment. Animals do the same in the wild. You don't see a tiger go "is this the right fat/protein ratio?", they simply stop when they had enough.

Government needs to get their hands out of our business and we need a completely different tax system.

lol, when you write things like that, it's like saying that you prefer to be shot in the left nee instead of the right one because it would hurt less...

Government is just a gang that claims the power to pass and enforce laws, tax people etc. It has been proven that this system only attracts people that want to profit and it can never function in the best interests of individuals.

By thinking we need a government you assume that a few people are so benevolent and virtuous that are able to meet the needs of everyone and at the same time not take advantage of their position of power. You'd have a hard time finding such saints.

My opinion is that several organizations in a competitive free market would be able to kick the ass of any government in terms of quality of service provided to people.

I lowered the blues and greens and I can still see the color blue, darker. I dont have the setting to turn it completely off.

So now, I'm supposed to fall asleep, right?

... i'm so curious to know that, which parts of our body makes more vit D? anyone knows!!

I'd say the part where there the skin is more oily.

You can also try raw coconut oil to nourish the skin while in the sun.

If the government cant stay small then it must be cut down to size
Anarchy is as much of a pipe dream as Utopia, ... sorry for being nonsensical

How would you cut to size something that has been historically proven to always grow and get corrupt?
Another question is "who's going to watch the watchers?" or who's going to grantee that it will stay small? a government agency?

I feel that this concept that "government is necessary because people are evil" is more like the "germ theory" that is enforced upon us by, guess who. Really.

The idea of a utopian society is flawed from the beginning in that it completely disregards the roots of human nature.  We were borne in adversity, struggle and triumph; not just against nature for survival, but against each other for the best food/resources/women/men/etc.  In an uncivilized society it made us stronger.  Furthermore, this struggle is all emotionally driven, and each of our emotions are chemical survival mechanisms that have been honed over millennia to ensure our survival in a tribal, uncivilized setting.  [check out http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/spirituality/the-true-nature-of-emotion/   for a better understanding of emotion].

I'd like to know how do you define an utopian society.
How would putting a bunch of people with guns in complete dominance (=statism) not completely disregard the roots of human nature?

I think this very concept, of human nature, is addressed and recognized in a libertarian society.
Think about it.
If there are 10 people, each with their own gun, and one of them suddenly claims obedience from the other 9 by threatening them, he will not be able to get it.

If you haven't done so, I would suggest you listen to Stef's arguments in my previous post and watch at least part 1 of that debate.
I think that libertarianism, while not perfect or utopic, at least addressed some of the core issues of our society.

Utopian society envisions no struggle, no one with more or less, no fighting or quarrels.  It's unrealistic because of human nature.  The real question is, can our scientists, engineers, and leaders figure out how to ensure our continued survival in the face of a cataclysmic event; and can they figure out how to preserve the planet which gave us life before overpopulation destroys it. 

These are not easy questions b/c they don't have easy answers.  If you don't have the stomach for it, turn back now.  The reality is that one day a comet is going to devastate us.  The reality is that while the planet can hold and feed plenty more people (from a feeding people perspective we aren’t overpopulated), all of those people do things like build cars, TVs, houses, consume resources – which all creates waste.  Toxic waste that pollutes our land, our sea our air.  Waste that kills insects, bees, reduces our intelligence.  Food that reduced lifespan, health, IQ. 

Civilization has created the de-evolution (devolution) of mankind in that people who would not survive in the wild b/c they lack the strength or intelligence, continue to pass on their genes.  They don’t get weeded out.  WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DEVOLVING.
And we are in the process of poisoning our planet due to overpopulation (the kind that consumes too many resources and produces too much waste).  Not only that, one day a huge meteor will be on a collision course with Earth.  Hopefully we have our weapons pointed at the right target instead of each other. 

So do you see why there may be some people in high places that don’t see any other way than to reduce populations and keep them under control?  Do you see how we are faced with a moral dilemma:  Do nothing, let people have their liberty until we poison the planet and cause mass death and suffering; OR try to forcibly reduce population using GMOs, vaccines, laws, etc.  They’re both “evil” outcomes.  Pick your poison.

To conclude:  for those of you who see utopian humanity as a simple, farming, growing culture with little emphasis on science and development, you ultimately believe that the doom of humanity finds us at a point and time of nature’s random choice.  We can’t go that route.  We have to form society, explore science, figure out how to ensure our survival and reverse temporary inevitable devolution with advanced technology (think genetic engineering) and try not to destroy ourselves with technology in the process. 

I could rant on, but that’s all that’s in me for now.

Guittarman out!

The idea that government can protect people of a cataclysmic event (or should regulate population growth) better than a competition driven free market does not seem plausible to me. In the case of a cataclysm, a government would more likely do like in the "2012" movie.

I cannot agree with the mentality of just waiting and pick up bits and pieces of what falls on the ground while losing your freedom of choice more and more.

If we take our raw meat and go live isolated in the woods, than we do not contribute anything to the progress of society and to the progress of ourselves. It wont be long before the woods will not provide shelter anymore. Than we would be forced to fight or to submit to eating canned processed foods just because in the past we turned our face away instead of trying to come up with a solution.

You can join the Primal Diet group and ask there:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/primaldiet/

To join you need to send an email to fox@hilarion.com

This is like 'high meat' for animals, very interesting.

I wonder what results would they get with animals fed exclusively on that.

I thought the proteins in eggs are very delicate, and blending could ruin them?  Just what I heard though, I'm not sure. ..

Blending cant possibly ruin them more than cooking and they are supposed to break down in your stomach anyway.

I used honey or lemon more for the taste, sometimes as little as a teaspoon of each.

sabertooth,
I think Stefan has a video about what you talk about the founders of the united states and how the statist system fails in the end. If I find it, I will post here.

Here is a wild idea of a real progress: what if the state would get its money from donations (like some churches do)?

A system where people will choose if and how much to pay only state organizations that have results and can be verified.

If this will happen on a large scale, nobody would pay to support ridiculous laws or wars. The very essence of a state based system is to impose mandatory taxation and this would be a great blow to its core.

So a useful "next step" in evolution of our freedom would be to at least expand this concept. To support every kind of flexible taxation law where people are allowed to choose where will the money go.

Other politicians will see that implementing flexible taxation will get them more voters and they will try to do it more and more.

Well, if you're in the army I recommend you check out Stefan Molyneux's channel on youtube. If you understand some of the concepts there you will quit. 

As for the diet, you are in a tough situation. I'm not sure if they would let you bring your own food but maybe pemmican could work.

You can at least go cooked paleo and say you are allergic to carbs or other junk foods. Most people tend to understand the "allergy" excuse and not question it.

Has anyone tried the "Thai Organc Life" coconut oil?

I just learned that the only way to guarantee that the oil is raw is to obtain it by fermentation.  Some say this brand is the only one that does it and also that most coconut oils (even cold pressed) are obtained by first overheating the coconut pulp.

Unfortunately they are in Thailand and the shipping would cost more than the bottle itself.

So far I tried an oil from the 'now' brand which helped a little with my sunburn at the time, but the skin still pealed off.

Anyway, would you think this thing could work for extracting coconut oil?