July 13, 200917 yr Oh, I think the best thing to look at could be your children, or someone else's children....... When you hear a child yelling and screaming and the parent is doing nothing....... sometimes that makes it worse....... There is the opposite too....... When a parent is way too mean, it makes things worse........ But then there are parents who allow their children to make mistakes, but they are also firm with a few rules, and they are consistent and strict when it is needed, and patient when it is needed. That would be the perfect government.... It is what it needs to be... Which is neither totalitarian, nor anarchist Okay, the "government = adult" analogy is tiresome, because the government isn't more experienced than the rest of society. Because Obama went to Harvard law school doesn't mean he (or any of the other 435 losers in Washington) know any more about running a society than the lay person. And this idea that "anarchy = chaos" is just lazy thinking. Anarchy is simply the absence of a government. The absence of government doesn't suddenly make people unethical lunatics. It just means there will be alternative ways to bring people to justice. What is "law"? It is a presumption. The presumption is that you signed a "social contract" (by being born here, within these imaginary geographic lines). That social contract is the Constitution. Oftentimes presidents break the constitution because of "emergencies". These emergencies are always dramatic (think 9/11 or WW2), but they typically don't pose a serious threat to the vast majority of the US population. Propaganda is used to make us feel like we are in danger, though. We are made to feel guilty for things we didn't do. "There are poor people! You must pay your fair share of taxes to support them!" "The Pakistanis are throwing rocks at Israeli children! You must pay taxes to support them." the list is endless. That's religious thinking. "Original sin" is the theory that you're guilty for something you didn't do (eat from the Tree of Knowledge). Now there is nothing wrong with paying money for any of these things, as long as it's done voluntarily. And there's nothing wrong with a social contract, just so it's a real contract - you've actually signed it. Nobody in their right mind would sign a contract for life. Various contracts would compete, offering different degrees of freedom and protection. Security firms would enforce them, and those firms that overstep their bounds would lose customers and profit (just like any other contractual business today). A voluntary society is possible!
July 13, 200917 yr And this idea that "anarchy = chaos" is just lazy thinking. Anarchy is simply the absence of a government. The absence of government doesn't suddenly make people unethical lunatics. It just means there will be alternative ways to bring people to justice. uh.... I never said that anarchy = chaos..... just sometimes....
July 13, 200917 yr We are made to feel guilty for things we didn't do. "There are poor people! You must pay your fair share of taxes to support them!" "The Pakistanis are throwing rocks at Israeli children! You must pay taxes to support them." the list is endless. I never said that the government should take care of us, just that it should protect us from harming each other when necessary. Like a parent should correct a child sometimes, and sometimes allow it to fail.
July 13, 200917 yr That's religious thinking. "Original sin" is the theory that you're guilty for something you didn't do (eat from the Tree of Knowledge). It is only religious in the sense that some people make it religious in their minds. The bible never says that the government should take care of anything. People want the government to become the nanny. They want big daddy to inject an IV in our arms with happy juice. This is simply WRONG. And it's a product of our own laziness. It is not necessarily a religious belief, though some people make it out to be one.
July 13, 200917 yr I never said that the government should take care of us, just that it should protect us from harming each other when necessary. Like a parent should correct a child sometimes, and sometimes allow it to fail. But my point is that the parent analogy is terrible. We're all adults here. Barney Frank and Henry Waxman and Barack Obama aren't any more mature than you or I are. We don't need a standing army anymore, either. Nuclear bombs eliminate that as a necessity.
July 13, 200917 yr Now there is nothing wrong with paying money for any of these things, as long as it's done voluntarily. And there's nothing wrong with a social contract, just so it's a real contract - you've actually signed it. I completely agree. I don't think the government should pay for any comforts. Nobody in their right mind would sign a contract for life. Various contracts would compete, offering different degrees of freedom and protection. Security firms would enforce them, and those firms that overstep their bounds would lose customers and profit (just like any other contractual business today). A voluntary society is possible! hmm.... eventually someone would get greedy and just take over with a military government... It's better to have a government that regulates itself when it is only people involved... which is why we have 3 branches
July 13, 200917 yr But my point is that the parent analogy is terrible. We're all adults here. Barney Frank and Henry Waxman and Barack Obama aren't any more mature than you or I are. We don't need a standing army anymore, either. Nuclear bombs eliminate that as a necessity. some people believe my analogies are always terrible...... I don't know why....... and......... we can't just blow up a place city by city.............................. I can't even argue agaisnt that
July 13, 200917 yr But the government doesn't regulate itself!!! At first we were told "Well, your state can secede if it doesn't like what the federal government is doing." And then Abraham Lincoln came along and put the kabash on that theory when the Southern states attempted to secede. 600,000+ Americans dead, more than in any other natural disaster/war/terrorist attack since. The most heinous terrorism to have ever occurred on American soil was committed by the Federal Government! So now States are left with practically no rights whatsoever, and they squabble over idiotic minutiae like whether to teach Creationism in schools or recognize gay marriages. While the Federal Government invades Middle Eastern nations and racks up an insane debt-load, nationalizes health care, nationalizes standards for auto mileage, etc. Then we were told the Judiciary would protect us. The Supreme Court is constantly expanding the power of the Federal Government, refusing to take up cases on wiretapping, habeus corpus, etc. Ruling that interstate commerce of any kind (even if it's indirect) means it can be taxed, taxed, taxed TAXED to death. Well maybe Congress can save us. With an approval rating in the 10's of percent, Congress's reelection rate is phenomenally high at 90%+. Is democracy really the best check on power? No. The best check on power is the profit motive. Voluntary interaction, NOT taxation!
July 13, 200917 yr some people believe my analogies are always terrible...... I don't know why....... and......... we can't just blow up a place city by city.............................. I can't even argue agaisnt that It's used as a deterrent. A nuclear state has never been invaded. That's why Iran and North Korea are so interested in broadcasting that they've got nukes - they know America can't do a damn thing about it.
July 13, 200917 yr It's used as a deterrent. A nuclear state has never been invaded. That's why Iran and North Korea are so interested in broadcasting that they've got nukes - they know America can't do a damn thing about it. Well we're just pussies. They couldn't do shit to our military, they could only fuck with other countries, since their missiles can't come close to us.
July 13, 200917 yr It's used as a deterrent. A nuclear state has never been invaded. That's why Iran and North Korea are so interested in broadcasting that they've got nukes - they know America can't do a damn thing about it. We could nuke em first!
July 13, 200917 yr It's used as a deterrent. A nuclear state has never been invaded. That's why Iran and North Korea are so interested in broadcasting that they've got nukes - they know America can't do a damn thing about it. oh, I kind of see what you're saying here.... I disagree but that is an entirely new topic :uhoh: I want to stick with the other stuff for now
July 13, 200917 yr Being an anarchist is a very oddball position to take because you have to be very cynical and simultaneously very optimistic about humanity. Cynical about all forms of government, and optimistic about a society lacking a government.
July 13, 200917 yr Dude I told you not to talk to Jay about Anarchy! it's too fun :wacky: But the government doesn't regulate itself!!! it does, but not enough..... it's TOO easy for congress to pass new laws.... I think that in order to pass new laws, there should be like 90% agreement or something... At first we were told "Well, your state can secede if it doesn't like what the federal government is doing." And then Abraham Lincoln came along and put the kabash on that theory when the Southern states attempted to secede. 600,000+ Americans dead, more than in any other natural disaster/war/terrorist attack since. The most heinous terrorism to have ever occurred on American soil was committed by the Federal Government! So now States are left with practically no rights whatsoever, and they squabble over idiotic minutiae like whether to teach Creationism in schools or recognize gay marriages. While the Federal Government invades Middle Eastern nations and racks up an insane debt-load, nationalizes health care, nationalizes standards for auto mileage, etc. Then we were told the Judiciary would protect us. The Supreme Court is constantly expanding the power of the Federal Government, refusing to take up cases on wiretapping, habeus corpus, etc. Ruling that interstate commerce of any kind (even if it's indirect) means it can be taxed, taxed, taxed TAXED to death. Well maybe Congress can save us. With an approval rating in the 10's of percent, Congress's reelection rate is phenomenally high at 90%+. Is democracy really the best check on power? No. I pretty much agree with everything here. But again, I never said our government is ideal. I actually said that our fed is getting WAY too big... And like I said above, I don't think they should ever pass anything except when there is a very high approval rating. The best check on power is the profit motive. Voluntary interaction, NOT taxation! hmmm..... well you could say this is the whole conversation.... Again, there need to be checks on everything.... This is why the ideal government is not possible in any way. And by the 'ideal government' I mean any kind, anarchy, republic, democracy, totalitarian, dictatorial, etc
July 13, 200917 yr Being an anarchist is a very oddball position to take because you have to be very cynical and simultaneously very optimistic about humanity. Cynical about all forms of government, and optimistic about a society lacking a government. very true..... and I think there could be some societies where it would work..... those are the individuals who deserve leadership..... they should be the governors of others..... the ones who are not corrupt and without greed
July 13, 200917 yr very true..... and I think there could be some societies where it would work..... those are the individuals who deserve leadership..... they should be the governors of others..... the ones who are not corrupt and without greed Greed is omnipresent, so you can't really get away from it. Power, on the other hand, is avoidable. Just decentralize everything to the max.
Create an account or sign in to comment