traxamillion United States. Dec 31 2014 06:50. Posts 10468
fda is not a good thing wake up people. they regulate the drug markets driving up costs and like baal said overegulate to the point of costing lives (aids and AZT) for $. FDA doesn't stop bs from hitting the market they might just not give it the approval stamp. The food we eat in this country is all garbage unhealthy GMO crud in spite of, or because of, the FDA. maybe in a free unsubsidized, unlobbied, unregulated food industry we would have more good, competitive, healthy, local food.
i think Baal is right in most everything he says
gnarly stop trolling; noone is talking about natural law, we are discussing contemporary government organizations as assembled by man.
1
traxamillion United States. Dec 31 2014 06:55. Posts 10468
'
Well there you fucking go, so stop pretending the government solves those things, because its extremely inefficient and unjust when it comes to crime.'
On December 30 2014 22:44 mnj wrote:
i'm pretty pro anarchy but think there is a need for minimal government. i think this is one of those issues not really worth discussing. there is a lot of content out there that some people will read with and agree with and some people who will never go out and read these books because these questions or thoughts never occurred.
anyway regardless the government is here to stay and will prob only get bigger.
I absolutely agree, however a government should be super decentralized and should actually represent people, unlike nowadays. I m not quite sure how to build such a system though so can't say more than that on this, cause even in countries like Switzerland where people vote online on many different topics @ referendums still show biased results
However this should be the main issue everyone discusses. We re all getting dust splashed in our eyes because a few people managed to get monopoly on most important sectors ( don't get me wrong even in sectors with good competition different corporations would still have the same goals and would just have a diverse monopoly ).
I'd say there isn't much worse that could take over, we have the planet getting chopped, we have a bunch of countries that starve to death, we have a bunch of countries that were destroyed due to wars so countries like the USA/ Russia can profit off them and we have people getting brainwashed by their TVs to believe that such actions are actually quite benefiting for them.... There was some american president that said that every generation should have a revolution ( too lazy to google him) and he was quite right imo, since a revolution would be a " reset " button in a way for the system
Gnarly I cant argue with the likes of you because you are narcissistic, you would dismiss any of my arguments mainly because you are uneducated and egocentric, that would be a time waste for me, i've tried presenting very legitimate arguments on many different topics, trying to explain very basic stuff to you and the result was always the same. Only an idiot would repeat the same mistake so many times.
P.S.
I forgot the most important name "Noam Chomsky" get your hands on anything this guys has published, said on tv or w/e. He s a genius
Last edit: 31/12/2014 07:06
1
traxamillion United States. Dec 31 2014 07:13. Posts 10468
On December 30 2014 21:20 Baalim wrote:
Yes they would, but corporations are dictated by the laws of offer and demand, a corporations that offer a shitty product or bloats the price or pisses off its costumers will lose ground to the competition on a free market society.
The state is not subjected to those laws, they will collect any amount of taxes they want regardless of their performance.
>corporations are in anarchistic societies
There you go, thinking your personal definition of anarchy is that without a public enforcer of government. Try using the original etymological use of the word, please.
Also, a "corporation" would be imposing it's own authority, publicly enforcing it's own shitty products, to try to stay alive. This can be done by slander campaigns or through more violent methods. Like, the amount of cognitive dissonance is to the extreme in your post.
Lol how can a company "enforce" products? A company offers products. A customer than has the option of whether or not to buy.
Am i talking to a 3 year old?
0
Gnarly United States. Dec 31 2014 08:48. Posts 1723
In a state of "anarchy" the company would have the option to violently impose its own authority over the consumer. It can be a farm in a community and that farm is run by a family and that family decides, "Fuck it, we're going to be the ONLY farm around here, so let's go fuck shit up for the other guys." Eventually, they own the entire market and their market happens to be food. They won't let anyone grow their own food. The only way to get it is through them. Otherwise, starve to death or die through violent means.
The US govt already wants to say that growing your own food is more dangerous than good along the lines of you don't know what the fuck you are doing and you could sell your faulty product to someone and they could get hurt. This is why selling lemonade in your own yard is illegal unless you have proper licensing and whatnot.
Diversify or fossilize!
1
brambolius Netherlands. Dec 31 2014 11:31. Posts 1708
How's about we already live in an anarchic world, with people who have the means to tell other people what to do, do so.
Heat......EXTEND
1
chris United States. Dec 31 2014 11:46. Posts 5503
baal all you have done is insult me, but havent offered any counter points, whatsoever, and you didnt send me links, and i know a little bit about how the roads were built in NJ, at least.
also, do you mind minding your manners please? i thought this was a discussion, not for you to hurl insults.
anarchy is by definition a chaotic environment. if you mean an absence of government, please explain, with examples, how society would continue to function in a well adjusted manner without any form of government.
also, when i made the point about vigilante justice, you say i am stupid and then go on to make a point to counter me, USING MY EXACT SAME POINT!
I not wish to insult you, but you seem incapable of communicating anything without insulting me. i think this is perhaps why a good chunk of the community does not like you (i am not among them).
i think it is great we can discuss philosophical ideas about not having a government and the merits of one existing or not existing, but jesus, show your intelligence instead of hurling faeces.
lastly, i will ask again - can you provide A SINGLE EXAMPLE of people functioning well in a society with out any form of government?
If you and I were alone, no government, etc, you would, as you have here, try to have me adhere to your views. The stronger of the two of us would impose his beliefs on the other, and voila, we have a power based structure, winner became the chief. even with animals this is true (and i can point out examples - mating among lions, bucks locking horns for mating rights, etc. and large cats protecting and marking their territory over others, on and on).
5 minute showers are my 8 minute abs. - Neilly
1
chris United States. Dec 31 2014 11:48. Posts 5503
On December 31 2014 05:55 traxamillion wrote:
'
Well there you fucking go, so stop pretending the government solves those things, because its extremely inefficient and unjust when it comes to crime.'
-baal
Amen
dude i didnt say it was perfect. but i will say this....trax, you were going to help my friend overdose on heroin and take his money. everything you write, i have to read with a grain of salt.
i did not pretend the government "solved" these things, it can be inefficient and unjust, but it is currently better than nothing. we do not live in a utopia.
5 minute showers are my 8 minute abs. - Neilly
1
chris United States. Dec 31 2014 11:53. Posts 5503
again, with anarchy, there is no authority to uphold any type of law. there is no money, we are on a barter system. there is little to no tech development, because there is no incentive - no money or reward, anything can be stolen.
no one has to do shit.
if you say "oh, anarchy is just the absence of government, everything else stays the same" i would love some example or reasoning outside of "haha you are stupid because you do not agree with me! i have a huge internet penis!"
I would love to read something that could sway my opinion.
and to follow up - just because i, personally, have not had 'justice' through the court system, and some innocents have been punished, or there have been unfair sentences, it does not mean that many others haven't had justice served or harmful criminals locked up. i think you should look at the larger picture....
also, if i may ask, why not libertarian vs anarchy? kind of a neat thread so far, if you can remove some trolling and insults
5 minute showers are my 8 minute abs. - Neilly
1
chris United States. Dec 31 2014 11:53. Posts 5503
On December 31 2014 10:31 brambolius wrote:
How's about we already live in an anarchic world, with people who have the means to tell other people what to do, do so.
On December 31 2014 10:53 chris wrote:
again, with anarchy, there is no authority to uphold any type of law. there is no money, we are on a barter system. there is little to no tech development, because there is no incentive - no money or reward, anything can be stolen.
no one has to do shit.
Read Brand's book he himself is an anarchist and so are the occupy movement leaders he talked to. They present the idea of anarchy in a way which could actually work even in current society. Anarchy does not necessarily mean lawless system where. He also presents the socialism in a workable way ( nothing to do with Russia's socialism, and socialism isn't really a terrible word as we are all taught ). I would explain it myself, but honestly i'm far from capable to do so in English.
There are so many absurd stuff happening even in the most developed countries. Why is anything connected to medical attention so expensive in the USA, we re not talking like 10-20% more expensive than Europe for example, we re talking 10x times ? Why are pharmaceutical companies allowed to pay doctors to use their meds?
I just remember how probably the most used powder for cold ( at least in Europe ) - Fervex got pulled out of the market 2 years ago because of insane violations of regulations ( found toxic bacteria in a batch, however they didnt renew the production seems fishy doesnt it ? ) after like what.. 10 years of existance? They sold it to people for at least a decade and people including myself possibly poisoned ourselves. Why isn't something as basic as weed legalized worldwide although it shows significant help in curing cancer ?
Why are automobile companies allowed to sell large batches of vehicles that have defects and they end up getting pulled out of the market after like 10 deaths through a large portion of time, do they really not have the technology to do better? Why do they sell vehicles that are made in a way that they should be repaired after xxxx kms ( don't get me wrong i don't expect 1 car to be able to go through 1mil kms without repairs, but you know what im talking about anyway ) ?
How is it that people like Khadaffi/Hussein are governing countries while the oiil companies have use of him, but the moment they go against them they get destroyed in the blink of an eye ? Were they not the same monsters before that ? Why is the USA allowed to have tens of thousands of drones above the air territory in the Mid East and just bomb any possible target not minding the innocent casulties "cause its the battle against terror" ?
Oh and I'd say most importantly all classified documents should be published. We are taught to believe that those documents are only classified because the masses wouldn't be able to accept the things that are hidden, that its for "our own good", while this might be true its absolutely retarded. Plus most of those documents are only hiding the things that the certain organization has done and are covering their own asses. Fuck them, we should be able to figure out things on ourselves, we dont need a fucking babysitter to decide for us.
Things like those are just on the top of my head of the absurdity and they are all absolutely unacceptable.
I'm not saying we should expect anything to just change by itself while we are shaking our feet on our comfortable chairs. Plus in order for anything to change we must first change ourselves from within otherwise its all predestined to fail before it has even begun. But we must start asking those questions
Btw doesn't it sound absurd to you guys that you think the government is the only body of authority that stops people from going out and looting rioting etc.? Really, Ferguson anyone ? How exactly could they stop that if the masses decide to do so ? Drop bombs on them ? Gas them to death ? What exactly ?
I still think that we are far from developed as a society to be living governmentless, but there should be a change in current system anyway since we re not progressing in that direction either
On December 31 2014 07:48 Gnarly wrote:
In a state of "anarchy" the company would have the option to violently impose its own authority over the consumer. It can be a farm in a community and that farm is run by a family and that family decides, "Fuck it, we're going to be the ONLY farm around here, so let's go fuck shit up for the other guys." Eventually, they own the entire market and their market happens to be food. They won't let anyone grow their own food. The only way to get it is through them. Otherwise, starve to death or die through violent means.
The US govt already wants to say that growing your own food is more dangerous than good along the lines of you don't know what the fuck you are doing and you could sell your faulty product to someone and they could get hurt. This is why selling lemonade in your own yard is illegal unless you have proper licensing and whatnot.
You are describing the current systems not anarchy.
The difference is the large farms are protected by the government and corporate interests. Unethically farmed mutant animals, high fructose corn shit, soyshit are protected by government subsidies and corporate lawyers and lobbyists. It is extremely difficult to carve out a living farming ethically. Ethical farmers are not subsidized and constantly being attacked by corporate lawsuits and shenanigans. The big farm shit ends up in the big box grocer. 90% of the food in there is all the same: subsidized corn shit, soy shit, mutant animal shit that is killing people and the environment for profit.
So, how to protect against this in future systems?
Stream of consciousness, off the top of my head thoughts:
#1 - Education based in truth on the current system.
My vision of how it would work is unfortunately based in truthful education, press. Farming on a more local, community level. Farm what makes the most sense based on culture, sustainability, climate, etc etc etc. Anti-shipping of mutant food thousands and thousands of miles. Smart, intelligent 1% charitable subsidies to the farming that makes sense. France and Italy are lucky in climate but they are also ahead of the curve in this regard. In France, baguettes, cheese, wine, mustard, all the foods that have been cherished in their culture for thousands of years are subsidized. People educated to make informed, intelligent, ethical choices when shopping for food. Not constantly being bombarded and seduced by junk food that is subsidized and produced to grab as much money out of the pocket before illness and death with no regard for the only planet in the universe we can currently inhabit.
This is the difficult caveat of anarchy: It requires ethical, moral, and spiritual growth within the individual and the community. Maybe it is coming off a bit hippie dippie but attempting to bring awareness and discussion on a lot of these issues out of love and a willingness to help is something I have found more meaningful than a lot of other occupations.
Anarchy has nothing to do with what 99% of people think it is. It doesn't mean you should not respect people and go out on the street killing anyone on sight and riot and destroy stuff.
I'm glad people like RikD are starting to question things.
Romm3l please the way you are talking about things are a result of a system which was designed to serve us the human population, but instead is turned around and only serves a few hundred thousand ( at most ). You have absolutely no idea how brainwashed we are, you should read about Bernays and then you should read the things he's written. It ll take a bunch of time though cause the way he writes makes me feel like i'm a retard.
To be honest there is way too much on this to just put it up in a topic, and even the 2 books above are just a slim part of the things everyone should read. And if i try to put out the ideas out of them I would just look like a conspiracy theorist, mostly cause my english isn't good enough to transmit their messages
We have alternatives, the main problem is, and i think here is where Brand's major mistake is, that people fear big changes unless it absolutely necessary to do them i.e. WW2 Hitler's regime etc.etc.
And honestly, Baal is probably years ahead of reading materials and way of thinking compared to most of you on this topic ( me too probably ) his ideas are legit. You guys should really start educating yourself and stop listening to mainstream nonsense whose only purpose is to bring more propaganda to the masses more.
On December 30 2014 19:34 Romm3l wrote:
I dont know if we live in the same world. I live in western europe and things are pretty damn good here. there aren't any russians or chinese invading. I can walk down the street without fear of being knived for my pocket change because there is a credible deterrent in place. People generally specialise and do their jobs because they expect they will be paid and able to spend their money in a stable system. people innovative and come up with quality of life enhancing things all the time because they have confidence the system will let them profit from their innovations through a patent system. productivity is high and im enjoying a standard of living superior to anyone in past human history.
good job bro, while you do that there are about 1 500 000 000 people that are living in absurd conditions and barely have things to eat, and another 2 000 000 000 that are close to the same path
but you are living in western europe and don't give a fuck so way to go
quality of your life will be as good as corporations want it to be, you re just another slave you just get to be on the brighter part of it
Why did the rich get a 30 trillion bailout @ 2008 but the common man got to get kicked out of his house and lose his job. Do you know that world hunger is estimated at 30 billion / year ( ofc that number will start to fall off with time of something is done about it ) thats absolutely nothing
Why does this kid have to go through all this trouble and struggle to get funding to do something good :
Why do people vote? Do you know that every USA president so far in history is the one that got the most funding ( most likely things will be the same in any "democratic " country ) ? They can just make it a fund raiser and highest one gets to be president.
And most of all why is LOBBYING still legal ? Answer to this last question with a morally legit answer and don't be bothered by it i dare you
if you want to participate in large-scale coordination of activity within a large society then there has to be a well-designed, credible and enforceable system of rules in place for it to be sustainable. if you want to call playing by the rules being a slave then go ahead, but in that case to live in a 'free' society is to build your own shelter and hunt/scavenge/barter for stuff you need because larger communities aren't sustainable without a credible and stable system of rules in place. unfortunately for those billions they don't live in places that have had stable institutions with well-designed rules in place over a long period. the proof is out there: look at the correlation between countries with strong legal institutions stable over time and some level of defence spending, and their prosperity. strong correlation.
i dont see how bank bailouts, corrupt politicians, illusion of democracy, and propensity of people to be fooled by PR invalidates any of this common sense. no govt is perfect because perfection is impossible. we only need govt to be good enough to enforce stable, reasonably designed rules which people have confidence will be enforced, so peoples' behaviour can be changed/naturally selected over time in such a way that the magic happens: extreme specialisation of labour, efficient trade and finance, incentives for innovation, welfare safety net, etc etc. bam, everyone's better off.
On December 30 2014 19:34 Romm3l wrote:
I dont know if we live in the same world. I live in western europe and things are pretty damn good here. there aren't any russians or chinese invading. I can walk down the street without fear of being knived for my pocket change because there is a credible deterrent in place. People generally specialise and do their jobs because they expect they will be paid and able to spend their money in a stable system. people innovative and come up with quality of life enhancing things all the time because they have confidence the system will let them profit from their innovations through a patent system. productivity is high and im enjoying a standard of living superior to anyone in past human history.
"Domesticated paradise, palm trees and pools
The water's blue, swallow the pill
Keepin' it surreal, whatever you like
Whatever feels good, whatever takes you mountain high
Keepin' it surreal, not sugar-free
My TV ain't HD, that's too real
Grapevine, mango, peaches, and limes, the sweet life
So why see the world, when you got the beach
Don't know why see the world, when you got the beach
The sweet life"
It is easy to make that post as someone in the 1% that pays minimum taxes on gambling winnings.
I am not entirely sure what to say. My motive in making this thread was not to be a confrontational asshole but rather to raise some awareness and thought and discussion. You obviously are not the problem. If I am speaking honestly I would urge anyone to get involved in communities and charities they believe in but the most important community is the family structure and neighbors. I find absolutely nothing wrong in someone living a simple life working towards a happy family. From my experiences, that is actually the life that makes the most sense ethically, morally, and spiritually and is the most sustainably rewarding.
For me though, I go through spurts when I just want to yell at the universe about local ethical farming, crypto currencies, government corruption, corporate corruption, et al. The nice thing about LP is I do not really have to censor myself in an open discussion format and there are a handful of other people that share my feelings and values and want similar things. We all kind of want similar things at the end of the day anyway. Cheers. Happy New Year.
0
Gnarly United States. Dec 31 2014 15:42. Posts 1723
On December 31 2014 10:53 chris wrote:
again, with anarchy, there is no authority to uphold any type of law. there is no money, we are on a barter system. there is little to no tech development, because there is no incentive - no money or reward, anything can be stolen.
no one has to do shit.
Read Brand's book he himself is an anarchist and so are the occupy movement leaders he talked to. They present the idea of anarchy in a way which could actually work even in current society. Anarchy does not necessarily mean lawless system where. He also presents the socialism in a workable way ( nothing to do with Russia's socialism, and socialism isn't really a terrible word as we are all taught ). I would explain it myself, but honestly i'm far from capable to do so in English.
There are so many absurd stuff happening even in the most developed countries. Why is anything connected to medical attention so expensive in the USA, we re not talking like 10-20% more expensive than Europe for example, we re talking 10x times ? Why are pharmaceutical companies allowed to pay doctors to use their meds?
I just remember how probably the most used powder for cold ( at least in Europe ) - Fervex got pulled out of the market 2 years ago because of insane violations of regulations ( found toxic bacteria in a batch, however they didnt renew the production seems fishy doesnt it ? ) after like what.. 10 years of existance? They sold it to people for at least a decade and people including myself possibly poisoned ourselves. Why isn't something as basic as weed legalized worldwide although it shows significant help in curing cancer ?
Why are automobile companies allowed to sell large batches of vehicles that have defects and they end up getting pulled out of the market after like 10 deaths through a large portion of time, do they really not have the technology to do better? Why do they sell vehicles that are made in a way that they should be repaired after xxxx kms ( don't get me wrong i don't expect 1 car to be able to go through 1mil kms without repairs, but you know what im talking about anyway ) ?
How is it that people like Khadaffi/Hussein are governing countries while the oiil companies have use of him, but the moment they go against them they get destroyed in the blink of an eye ? Were they not the same monsters before that ? Why is the USA allowed to have tens of thousands of drones above the air territory in the Mid East and just bomb any possible target not minding the innocent casulties "cause its the battle against terror" ?
Oh and I'd say most importantly all classified documents should be published. We are taught to believe that those documents are only classified because the masses wouldn't be able to accept the things that are hidden, that its for "our own good", while this might be true its absolutely retarded. Plus most of those documents are only hiding the things that the certain organization has done and are covering their own asses. Fuck them, we should be able to figure out things on ourselves, we dont need a fucking babysitter to decide for us.
Things like those are just on the top of my head of the absurdity and they are all absolutely unacceptable.
I'm not saying we should expect anything to just change by itself while we are shaking our feet on our comfortable chairs. Plus in order for anything to change we must first change ourselves from within otherwise its all predestined to fail before it has even begun. But we must start asking those questions
>occupy movement
Nope.gif. They would give the law to the most oppressed people, then those who are more privileged would be held to a higher standard of laws. This is taken from the way they had their discussions in which the most oppressed people were allowed to speak first, and the more privilege you had, the less likely you were even able to voice an opinion.
Diversify or fossilize!
0
Gnarly United States. Dec 31 2014 15:42. Posts 1723
On December 31 2014 11:33 Spitfiree wrote:
Btw doesn't it sound absurd to you guys that you think the government is the only body of authority that stops people from going out and looting rioting etc.? Really, Ferguson anyone ? How exactly could they stop that if the masses decide to do so ? Drop bombs on them ? Gas them to death ? What exactly ?
I still think that we are far from developed as a society to be living governmentless, but there should be a change in current system anyway since we re not progressing in that direction either
>it's not in our nature to be violent
That's why we are the most violent species in the world, right?
Diversify or fossilize!
0
Gnarly United States. Dec 31 2014 15:54. Posts 1723
On December 31 2014 07:48 Gnarly wrote:
In a state of "anarchy" the company would have the option to violently impose its own authority over the consumer. It can be a farm in a community and that farm is run by a family and that family decides, "Fuck it, we're going to be the ONLY farm around here, so let's go fuck shit up for the other guys." Eventually, they own the entire market and their market happens to be food. They won't let anyone grow their own food. The only way to get it is through them. Otherwise, starve to death or die through violent means.
The US govt already wants to say that growing your own food is more dangerous than good along the lines of you don't know what the fuck you are doing and you could sell your faulty product to someone and they could get hurt. This is why selling lemonade in your own yard is illegal unless you have proper licensing and whatnot.
You are describing the current systems not anarchy.
The difference is the large farms are protected by the government and corporate interests. Unethically farmed mutant animals, high fructose corn shit, soyshit are protected by government subsidies and corporate lawyers and lobbyists. It is extremely difficult to carve out a living farming ethically. Ethical farmers are not subsidized and constantly being attacked by corporate lawsuits and shenanigans. The big farm shit ends up in the big box grocer. 90% of the food in there is all the same: subsidized corn shit, soy shit, mutant animal shit that is killing people and the environment for profit.
So, how to protect against this in future systems?
Stream of consciousness, off the top of my head thoughts:
#1 - Education based in truth on the current system.
My vision of how it would work is unfortunately based in truthful education, press. Farming on a more local, community level. Farm what makes the most sense based on culture, sustainability, climate, etc etc etc. Anti-shipping of mutant food thousands and thousands of miles. Smart, intelligent 1% charitable subsidies to the farming that makes sense. France and Italy are lucky in climate but they are also ahead of the curve in this regard. In France, baguettes, cheese, wine, mustard, all the foods that have been cherished in their culture for thousands of years are subsidized. People educated to make informed, intelligent, ethical choices when shopping for food. Not constantly being bombarded and seduced by junk food that is subsidized and produced to grab as much money out of the pocket before illness and death with no regard for the only planet in the universe we can currently inhabit.
This is the difficult caveat of anarchy: It requires ethical, moral, and spiritual growth within the individual and the community. Maybe it is coming off a bit hippie dippie but attempting to bring awareness and discussion on a lot of these issues out of love and a willingness to help is something I have found more meaningful than a lot of other occupations.
Farms weren't always protected. There was a very, very, very long time in which they weren't. You say unethically farmed animals, I say give me proof of that as an standard average in the industry that isn't some propaganda by the very industry itself. Where I live, there are plenty of farms that do things "ethically". They raise their animals and tend to their crops like most humans have done so in history. >killing the enviroment I supposed you think that wind power is a viable option? Too bad, cause you need to do your research. If we were really out to destroy the environment for profits, we wouldn't be doing things like they do in the logging industry where they protect the environment to protect their profits. They only log certain areas in strips at a time allowing these strips to grow after they have cut down the trees.
Your vision, or what authority you wish to impose on others, if asinine because honesty isn't always the best policy. The public doesn't have the ability to govern itself because they believe in stupid shit without actually having done any research or lived any first-hand experiences. This is why America is a republic, where we elect people who are knowledgeable in certain areas.
Out of all the restaurants I've worked at and all the people that I know that own and operate their own places are able to buy food locally very easily. I mean, cmon, the food HAS to be bought locally otherwise it wouldn't be fresh. Chipotle will go and personally visit the "smaller" farms and personally inspect the livestock and how the animals are treated and whatnot. I've seen it first hand.
>farm
>sustainability
We could double the world's population and still have easily enough space on this planet to farm for even more.
You need to look up what the etymology of the word anarchy is, instead of using your own personal definition. Communities can't exist without a chief. Each individual has a self-government over themselves. The idea that anarchy is actually attainable is a farce, as we will always seek to replace order once it's gone. And again, you would still like to impose your own authority over others.
Diversify or fossilize!
1
sniderstyle United States. Dec 31 2014 16:50. Posts 2046
I think people desire anarchy or voluntarism because it's a reaction to the failures of the status quo. If the status quo were more in line with the nature of human passions and desires, there would be no need for that.
It's when you see it can be done faster, simpler, better, while being in the moral and ethical high ground yet you're forced into a worse system.
If the system was fixed, we could do greater things as a group than the individual could do in its own. The only way to fix it is to at first start over. Then create better rules with the mindfulness of what went wrong. Corruption and money in politics. And allow individuals to innovate. If the system gets in the way of innovation then it is not a good system.
It is important to Give people like Elon Musk and all the greater Internet innovators room to do what they do.
Genginho: lose today 100 dollar only because of fishs they called and had luck on river
On December 31 2014 03:59 fira wrote:
so essentially the government protects ppl from companies who are willing to use violence for profit. at the same time the government itself is kind of a 'company' willing to use 'violence' for profit if ppl are disobedient. not as bad as like, a total dictatorship though, since it needs to be not super evil or it'd get overthrown?
i guess the current government exists in order to keep something worse from taking over? like in an anarchic society, cant some evil geniuses come together, secure a massive amount of power (money, land, whatever) and start doing really bad things and no one would be able to stop them because they have too much power? in a sense, they'd become the new government?
A total dictatorship IS a form of government, dont equate government to a democratic 1st world country state, because that is the less vicious form through out history, but only because it has adapted to more civilized times dont think that its not the root of most of worlds problems.
So the government prevents evil geniues from taking power and do terrible things right?
United States. Dec 31 2014 12:37. Posts 8552
