Are you a statist?

Originally posted by dadudemon
This line of reasoning leads to absurd results.

"I should be free to do this and that."

this = raping children and old people

that = hunting down humans for sport

The key, and the "sun" of ethics, is the non-aggression principle. Porcupine.

People can and already do rape children and possible old people, law doesn't prevent it. If we're talking about absurd then that's an absurd conclusion to the point of the message and the immorality of the state. The necessary evil always crumbles and the citizens screwed in a state of unprepared destructive anarchy, not the good awakened to reality kind.

I mean, you're already free to rape children. But you will have consequences. If you want a government to keep you from raping children and old people then by all means pay for one! While they do the same thing with your taxes 😛 But do you think I am free to not be a tax cow for them?

Originally posted by dadudemon

We give up "this" and "that" for other freedoms. You are free to live your life without having to fortify your abode from the perpetrators of "this" and "that." If you have to constantly watch your back and the backs of your loved ones, your other freedoms take a drastic hit.

So the government has to take your freedom to give you freedom? Take your freedom from doing this and that, like smoke pot in certain places and all these regulations, and to keep what you earn? Its sounds illogical doesn't it? It never turns out good. The freest society that the US was turned out into such a giant beast and does insane unimaginable things with our acceptance and imagination toward it.

We can do what they provide, better. Its silly to think otherwise

Originally posted by dadudemon

I am positive that there are those out there that really really really wish they could openly exercise the freedoms of "this" and "that", but they are restricted from doing so because we have, as a people, generally agreed that some sort of laws and police-force are necessary.

So we have to pay for a government to disobey these laws and commit these acts we dont want done? Authority to PEOPLE because we are all PEOPLE. It doesn't make sense and look how it ends up. You dont think we can have voluntary police without a group of people who claims to have authority to force us idiots to do it? Come on. It sounds like instilled fear. Its a tool of the state.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Now, you and I obviously agree that we've gone a bit ape-shit with all the rules we call "laws" in the US. There are so many different opinions out there at what level these laws should govern that we cannot do much about our current situation. However, I noticed something: those people that are between 15-35 are getting pretty damn tired of this over-governing. Just guessing, but I think we will eventually see quite a few law changes over the next 3 decades...at least, a loosening of the laws. It would help if people like you ran for public office.

DAMN QUOTE TAG COPY-PASTE SHIT!

Theres no voting back freedom. These are just people, sociopaths aiming for domination and power most likely. You're worried about killers so you open the gate for the most destructive ones. We can do better than the ugly we's.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The weak cannot oppress the strong. Power is a relationship, you can only be powerful relative to another person. The oppressed are always the weak. Any argument based on the idea that its bad for the weak to control the strong is absolute gibberish.

touche

both Nietzsche and Rand have fairly similar views of what constitutes "power", namely individuals who excel in spite of the machinations of society. Like, "the powerful" isn't a reference to the power relationship, but a group of individuals who posses certain traits that the authors thought were "power", and really just reflect traditional masculine views.

The Ubermench's ability to crush others had to be resisted by the imposition of morality by the non-ubermench. and ya, in relative terms, that is their power...

/rambling needlessly

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Government/taxation/etc are not a perfect system, but they are better than the alternative.

I think otherwise. You're saying you don't know what to fund so you need someone to force you and others to do so? While they do whatever they want with the rest after they rip you off with their services?

Originally posted by Ascendancy

Without them there would be little choice but to live in small collectives each eking out an existence.

There could be big cities. It doesn't have to be small. I'm sure you can do that if you want to be in a rural area. When people are free, they operate much better. The regulations aren't to help you but restrict you. Its a scheme. You can do better without them. As can we.

Originally posted by Ascendancy

If one had need of something from another locale, then one would have to communicate with the people there and make some kind of arrangement. Likely a consensus would have to be reached by a group within that collective to make sure that everyone would feel safe about the transaction, and so on and so fourth. This would either remain small time and be a situation in which everyone lives with a general sense of unease, or it would build into a government system of some sort.

I can't say I know for sure what would happen. This would possible be one small scenario. People often wondered where the slaves would after after freeing them. Who will pick the cotton and where they would go but whats important is that you end slavery first. If we can't figure out how to operate it then how can we elect people to figure out how to operate it and give them guns and a funnel of money? Its crazy.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
The only times I read or see anything close to utopias is in novels and films in which there is an incredibly small population whose entire set of needs is met without issue, and this generally accomplished by a great utilization of advanced technology. A planet with billions in population, haves and have nots, and a myriad of cultures and religious in all likelihood is an environment incapable of existing as anything like a utopia. We could come relatively close if interactions were kept to a relatively small scale, but that's not likely to happen either. Governments may give the illusion of freedom in some senses, but it is that same system that makes it relatively safe to travel as you like and to interact with those you choose to.

Its not a utopia. Its freedom and voluntarism. Its not going to prevent bad things from happening because they just happen. Theres a lot of people. But giving someone the power to do bad things on a huge scale is just insane and a huge step in the wrong direction. Its just that we are taught that it isnt. The master controls that

Originally posted by Oliver North
that sort of misses the point though... yes, government makes the black market because it specifically makes things illegal. sure. And with no government, there is no black market. However, what you still have are people willing to exploit each other for financial gain, now operating as the only market that people have no choice but participate in.

the government isn't the absolute cause of all exploitative behaviour.

If you want to voluntarily be exploited, go for it. Government regulations make it hard to compete. No one is going to exploit anyone, it doesn't sound possible. Corporations are government created entities. All these guys make money off intellectual property backed by government power as well.

It is one of the biggest causes. How many people has governments killed this century? I'm sure you know of our wars. It is the most destructive. Its imprisons victimless crimes. Sanctions countries. 500,000 dead iraqi children that were deemed justified. Its a very destructive superstition. The most, probably more than religion even though I say It is a religion.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
The key, and the "sun" of ethics, is the non-aggression principle. Porcupine.

People can and already do rape children and possible old people, law doesn't prevent it. If we're talking about absurd then that's an absurd conclusion to the point of the message and the immorality of the state. The necessary evil always crumbles and the citizens screwed in a state of unprepared destructive anarchy, not the good awakened to reality kind.

I mean, you're already free to rape children. But you will have consequences. If you want a government to keep you from raping children and old people then by all means pay for one! While they do the same thing with your taxes 😛 But do you think I am free to not be a tax cow for them?

I'm pretty sure war-time anarchy has proven your point completely and utterly wrong: all sorts of human atrocities occur. Of course, there are all sorts of reasons why people go apeshit in situations like that...but you cannot argue that a decent policing system actual prevents crimes from occurring. You cannot reasonably expect old people and children to be able to fight off attackers, either. A trained and educated police-force is a great way to prevent things like "this" and "that".

Originally posted by Mairuzu
So the government has to take your freedom to give you freedom? Take your freedom from doing this and that, like smoke pot in certain places and all these regulations, and to keep what you earn? Its sounds illogical doesn't it? It never turns out good. The freest society that the US was turned out into such a giant beast and does insane unimaginable things with our acceptance and imagination toward it.

To your first question, yes: that's been covered/stated already. To the rest, I pretty much agree.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
We can do what they provide, better. Its silly to think otherwise

I also agree, here.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
So we have to pay for a government to disobey these laws and commit these acts we dont want done?

This question makes no sense. As in...it is incoherent. I think I know what you're trying to ask so I'll rephrase your question:

"We end up having to pay for a government and wend up with people disobeying these laws, anyway?"

or maybe you meant to make a statement instead of asking a question:

"There are those that can pay the government to disobey these laws and commit these acts that we don't want done."

Originally posted by Mairuzu
Authority to PEOPLE because we are all PEOPLE. It doesn't make sense and look how it ends up. You dont think we can have voluntary police without a group of people who claims to have authority to force us idiots to do it? Come on. It sounds like instilled fear. Its a tool of the state.

We can certainly have a voluntary police force. But that does not solve the problem I responded to and you are addressing. You only eliminate taxes by having a voluntary police force. You still create the problem of the loss of freedoms because:

1. You created laws that restricted freedoms/choices.
2. You established a police force to enforce #1.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
Theres no voting back freedom.

Tell that to the thousands upon thousands of gay couples that are now married.

Or how about our great grandparents that saw the fall of Prohibition?

What about the granting of voting rights to our women (my great parents are all dead, now, but most of them were around when it happened).

Finally, what about all the fine African American men and women that got some nice new freedoms after the Civil Rights movement?

The defeatist attitude you're using is unproductive. You're sounding just like every single other person out there that complains but does nothing. You as a person can do something about the things you don't like about the government. Run for public office, get elected, push your freedom agenda, and get followers.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
These are just people, sociopaths aiming for domination and power most likely. You're worried about killers so you open the gate for the most destructive ones. We can do better than the ugly we's.

I'm not too worried about killers. I'm just pointing out the obvious flaws with your argument about freedom. It leads to absurd/stupid conclusions about freedom.

Closed. Mairuzu, if you re-open a thread I straight out closed from you again, or argue my decisions, you will be banned. This is just a copy/pasted info dump (done without giving due credit), and you are not advancing any sort of useful line- merely baiting others into responses so you can criticise them. It is an utterly void process that is functionally identical to a lot of conspiracy threads. The very title of this thread is a presumptive trolling. This sort of poor quality thread will not lead to any sort of useful debate beyond 'yes it is' 'no it isn't'.

Do not do it again.

Incidentally, you lying about about it being 'no-one's work' that you just pasted in here is contemptible. At this point, you are just a liar causing trouble, not the slightest bit interested in any actual useful process of debate or argument, and on that basis I don't want your threads.