Franc's 210$ USA Challenge

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

Aah, the whole challenge is faulty.  If we're not talking about government, then how would this statement lead to proof that "the United States of America exists and is legitimate"?

I can prove the statement simply based on world affairs.  We are recognized by our peers as a nation and a legitimate entity.  It's only idiots like you who love playing around with the English language who think they can prove otherwise.  You're bullshit, as ever, Franc.

If we're not talking about government, then how would this statement lead to proof that "the United States of America exists and is legitimate"?

I never said the statement led to anything. It is used as a definition of "legitimate." Nothing more.

If you're going to apply for a challenge, at least prove that you can read what the instructions say. So far you have failed to do so repeatedly.

I can prove the statement simply based on world affairs.  We are recognized by our peers as a nation and a legitimate entity.

If you knew logical fallacies at all, you'd know this is an argument from popularity. Popular opinion does not make something true. You lose again.

It's only idiots like you who love playing around with the English language who think they can prove otherwise.

I have claimed to prove nothing. You did. And you failed, and shown yourself a total arse in the process.

You're bullshit, as ever, Franc.

You are confrontational, you cannot read simple instructions, and you have already failed three times. All further submissions on your part will be rejected.

You are the weakest link. Goodbye.

You are the weakest link. Goodbye.

Please never say that ever again, it makes me want to hit people.

Consider it a compliment Roundy!  I did!   

Franc calling someone the weakest link is no insult.

But it does make me want to hit people. I hate people saying that. Fucking Anne Robinson!

The joke got old over here about two weeks before the show ever aired!

We had to put up with it longer, feel sorry for us over here!

All further submissions on your part will be rejected.

Damn.  I'm so disappointed I am no longer eligible for your imaginary reward.

So you're accusing me and the other pledgers of lying. Very well. That is your right, but only reinforces my decision.

If you believe we are lying, then why even try? You are dishonest as well, it seems.

You are lying, because no matter how reasonable a response you get you'll twist it around.

And, yes, I can be dishonest sometimes too.  Of course I never expected to win anything, because there's no actual debate here.  I know how people like you operate, Franc.

Well, I can't really expose or attack what doesn't really exist, now can I?

The fact that I talk about "America" most is because most of the people I talk to, and write for, are supposedly from there. That's all.

As an Anarchist, I reject all governments equally. But like atheists mostly talk about Christianity, I talk about what I know the most. It's just a consequence of not having a hundred years available to study all governments on Earth and why they are bollocks.

And no, I do not think I am superior to anyone. Just better informed. Anyone can figure this stuff out if they'll think for a week or two.

I think I may have seriously misunderstood your other thread.  How can you deny that governments exist?  I could understand the debates about whether or not governments SHOULD exist or whether the governments that do exist are effective or not, or even why *insert any governing system* fails... heck, I understand if you hate every government ever on sheer principle.  But surely they exist... I hope I'm just misunderstanding you, but when you say "supposedly from there" it sounds like you're denying the very existence of the country itself.  Granted, the U.S. government is not a legitimate governing body by standards outlined in the Declaration of Independence.  But let's face it: illegitimate or legitimate, stupid or brilliant, led by farmers or led by dictators... it does exist. 


This is copied from another thread where ti didn't really belong, but I thought it made sense to post it here.

Once again... I am not "denying that government exists." Cut the straw men, kiddos.

For the sake of all the idiots who can't read, I added a note to the Challenge so it was clear that "government" is not the issue here. For the record, I do believe that government can be said to exist meaningfully (but not legitimately), but this does not meet the Challenge requirements either way, so it's completely irrelevant ot the Challenge.

exist: (verb): to be, especially to be a real, actual, or current thing, not merely something imagined or written about.
legitimate: (adjective): complying with the law, or under the law; "derive(s) its powers from the consent of the governed".

If these are the definitions of these words, I will continue.
United States:
- Is real, actual, and current (current meaning near the present time).
- Derives its powers from the governed (or citizens), as in: voting, the House of Representatives, having a citizen in positions of power (not only royalty as leader), having court system and right to defend one's self in front of a jury, being able to take a president from his position (Richard Nixon).

Hee hee, Do I win?

Read the Challenge text again. The term "legitimate" has already been defined.

"Follows the law" is not adequate, since the law of the State is itself an arbitrary construct. You can pass a law saying that pi equals 3, or making overflowing rivers illegal, but either way it doesn't mean shit.

You say that the fact that we are recognized as a legitimate entity doesn't make it so.  I think in world matters such as this one all that really counts is how we're perceived by the rest of the world.  We are perceived by every other nation of the world, be they friend or foe, to be a legitimate entity, therefore we are.

You're a moron, Franc.

Flatty there's no way anyone can win this challenge, no matter what they say. There is no way of proving the USA is a legitimate entity or whatever exactly what Franc wanted proven, simply because when someone's mind is made up nothing you say will change it, and to prove it would be to change his mind. Impossible.



(note: not saying either one of you is right)

I can't believe you're taking his side!  I feel betrayed!

I'm not taking any sides! Stop accusing me! 

Arguing that one of his ridiculous propositions might be correct is like saying that it is!

Anything might be correct (within reason) and I don't want to judge cos I don't like getting involved in political arguments that much as politics is my life at the moment so i've had enough of it really.

Flatty there's no way anyone can win this challenge, no matter what they say. There is no way of proving the USA is a legitimate entity or whatever exactly what Franc wanted proven, simply because when someone's mind is made up nothing you say will change it, and to prove it would be to change his mind. Impossible.

I am not asking anyone to "change my mind." I am asking anyone to present an argument that proves the point. It does not say anywhere in the rules that I have to embrace the winning argument and make it my new position.

Once again... I am not "denying that government exists." Cut the straw men, kiddos.

This post has been repeatedly edited because it was way too long for what it was meant to be saying.

Summarized version:  I know.  I just think you say things sometimes in ways that make you sound like you're implying something you aren't.  It is hard to keep track of what you mean, for me.

Just read the Challenge text. As far as you're concerned, on this thread that's ALL I mean.

Quote from: Franc T., Planar on May 20, 2007, 11:11:04 AM

Once again... I am not "denying that government exists." Cut the straw men, kiddos.

This post has been repeatedly edited because it was way too long for what it was meant to be saying.

Summarized version:  I know.  I just think you say things sometimes in ways that make you sound like you're implying something you aren't.  It is hard to keep track of what you mean, for me.

That's because he keeps changing what he means.

Just read the Challenge text. As far as you're concerned, on this thread that's ALL I mean.

On this thread, perhaps.  But when I tried to bring it up on the other thread, you told me I was off topic so I edited and put it here.

I'm just trying to figure out what you mean when you say "Well, I can't really expose or attack what doesn't really exist, now can I?" It sounds to me like you're implying that it might not exist.  And "Supposedly from there" implies that they aren't actually from there, to me, but I must be mistaken, so what do you actually mean?

I know these questions are not relevant to the challenge, but for the sake of trying to make sense out of what you say in other threads, can't you just answer them here anyway, or would it be more appropriate for me to just make a thread about it?

I know these questions are not relevant to the challenge, but for the sake of trying to make sense out of what you say in other threads, can't you just answer them here anyway, or would it be more appropriate for me to just make a thread about it?

Don't even bother.  Wasted effort.

Quote from: Mongrelman... Or so I'm told... on May 22, 2007, 01:11:35 AM

I know these questions are not relevant to the challenge, but for the sake of trying to make sense out of what you say in other threads, can't you just answer them here anyway, or would it be more appropriate for me to just make a thread about it?

Don't even bother.  Wasted effort.

I know, but it isn't much effort, and I don't have anything else to be doing, so meh.