Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And the government they formed has become a flaming failure, because it attracted to it the very gluttonous aggressors that it was supposedly designed to protect against.Reading all this lends credence to my general thought that people are pretty good in isolation, perhaps mostly because they need to worry about their own survival. As soon as they get together in groups, a lot of bad shit can and does happen almost purely in the name of good intentions.
If anyone knows who Bo Burnham is, allow me to quote a part at the end of his song "Love Is." Love is... being the owner of a company that makes rape whistles. And even though you started the company with good intentions trying to reduce the rate of rape, now you don't want to reduce it all because if the rape rate declines you'll see an equal decline in whistle sales.
It's easy for a group of people to convince themselves that (using the example above) eliminating that one guy and taking his farm over there is a good thing, cause more people would benefit than would suffer cause we'd spread the wealth of that farm around, and that guy is a dick anyway. So yea, there's no good reason not to do it. Meanwhile, you've completely ignored the fact that maybe he's not so bad, you just let your greed get in the way of objectively evaluating him. And the reason you want his farm is because he's smart enough to figure out a way to get a better yield. So sure, kill him, but no one is left that understands how he got that higher yield, and now that you've killed one guy, it's not big leap to kill another, and another and another, again, all in the name of good intentions. That's authority for you.
To Gator's point though: just like socialism, it just takes one asshole to fuck it up. That system relies on everyone thinking the same way, holding their envy in check, holding their aggression or gluttony in check. We all would like to think that people will make the smart, altruistic decisions but they won't, not all of them anyway, not all the time. That's probably why the founders saw government as a necessary evil.
Maybe these words are just cliches to the idiots who grew up in front of the boob tube and violent video games but you have to define the terms. As far as I'm concerned an anarchist supports the violent overthrow of the government and a libertarian supports strict adherence to the Constitution.
Yup. That's what happens when you have people in charge of running the government.And the government they formed has become a flaming failure, because it attracted to it the very gluttonous aggressors that it was supposedly designed to protect against.
View attachment 191110
They could obviously pay their property taxes, but couldn't pony up $6.00 and change a month for fire protection?!?...Seriously??Wow. At $75 per year, you would think they would just pay it. But, I like the $3,500 fee for failure to pay.So you object to people paying for the actual cost of the service?
OK...Is that somehow supposed to be some kind of evidence that it should exist at all?Yup. That's what happens when you have people in charge of running the government.And the government they formed has become a flaming failure, because it attracted to it the very gluttonous aggressors that it was supposedly designed to protect against.
View attachment 191110
I am not ignoring it. I know that to be a fact.
I also know that we are not mature enough or moral enough to have a society with no government. Too many assholes to allow that to happen.
Lets first do away with this bloated, debt ridden, liberty stealing, out of control welfare state and see how that goes. Then we can determine if we can go even further.
Life sucks living under socialismThe only thing worse than taxation without representation is taxation with representation. Under the king we paid 5% of our GDP in taxes. Under democracy we pay 50%.Because we live in a Republic.Government sucks.
The best thing you can say about it is that it is a necessary evil.
The thing that makes Democracy government sucks so much is that Democracy allows 51% of the people to steal from the 49% and that is thievery.
I consider myself as Libertarian although I don't believe in all Libertarian positions such as abortion and free and open borders.
We need to have a stronger ironclad Bill of Rights to prevent the government from taking our money and giving it to others and to protect our liberties.
I have no problem paying my share of the minimal and necessary government programs like defense, courts, police, roads etc. However, absolutely no welfare, subsidies, entitlements or bailouts.
Why don’t the 51% have a right to dictate law to the 49%?
Democracy is as terrible as any other form of government when it takes away Liberties and enables thievery.
Democracy is two wolves and sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Our Republic is weak when it doesn't protect liberties and allows the thievery. That is why we need a stronger Bill of Rights to prevent oppression.
I don't want all the assholes that live in the big city shitholes electing dumbassea that pass laws to take money away and give to the welfare queens that elected them, do you? If you do then you are an idiot or one of the welfare queens.
How does yourunderstanding of the mythical contract preclude the beliefs of others (progressives in particular), who believe that it does in fact call for aggressive coercion, at gunpoint if necessary, all for the equally nebulous "common good"?My understanding of 'social contract'--has nothing to do with gunpoint or anything else. How does your community determine who has the authority to disperse the funds raised at the fund raisers? What do you do if such authority misuses or steals the funds? Just shrug it off and say 'oh well'?
Odd ideas.......ODDMy old ideas?!?...You're the one here trying to rationalize a flawed model that has been foisted upon the populace since the industrial revolution....Not very "progressive" of you at all.Oh please!! You just trying to explain it away while clinging to your odd ideas. Here is more
Putting Out Fires for a Fee
Firefighters in South Fulton, Tenn., have let two homes burn to the ground over the past two years since the city commission started enforcing a rule that the department serve only subscribers who pay the $75 annual fee. The city commission is expected to vote Thursday whether to amend that policy to allow the fire department to put out all blazes and then bill nonsubscribers $3,500 for the service. Paying members wouldn't be billed.
There are always only 2 reasons, with or without law:And we put rules and authority in place to enforce the idea. Anarchy would remove those and rely on the individual to do the right thing.
If we both own a farm and I want more, under anarchy there is no good reason for me not to to kill you if I can and take your farm.
How does you understanding of the mythical contract preclude the beliefs of others (progressives in particular), who believe that it does in fact call for aggressive coercion, at gunpoint if necessary, all for the equally nebulous "common good"?My understanding of 'social contract'--has nothing to do with gunpoint or anything else. How does your community determine who has the authority to disperse the funds raised at the fund raisers? What do you do if such authority misuses or steals the funds? Just shrug it off and say 'oh well'?
It's just a statement. An observation.OK...Is that somehow supposed to be some kind of evidence that it should exist at all?
But not so flawed that they can be trusted with creating a monopoly, for a few to use aggressive and coercive force upon the many?!?The point I made is the reason why anarchy will never work. You may not want to accept it but the fact is that there are too many assholes on earth that would gladly kill, rape, brutalize and steal if they could get away with it without collective constraints.
I have yet to see a good plan to transitions the present government constraints (as bad as they are) to an anarchically society. It ain't gonna happen. People are too flawed to make anarchy work.
Not an argument.Odd ideas.......ODD
Whatever you call the new thing you give power and authority to, the same thing will happen because that is the nature of mankind.
You can throw the baby out with the bath water or you can choose to use the system we were given to reign in the power of the government. Remember, in this country at least we have the government we vote for.
Because any progressives or others who say that it does are woefully ignorant and have absolutely no understanding of what social contract is. That does not mean, however, that there can be no means of enforcing the social contract, once the people mutually agree on it, i.e. a private fire department can fight whatever fires it chooses via whatever private contracts it has with people. A volunteer fire department formed under social contract is far less likely to be so choosy about what fires it will fight. In both cases however, concern for fellow human beings can play a part.
Maybe these words are just cliches to the idiots who grew up in front of the boob tube and violent video games but you have to define the terms. As far as I'm concerned an anarchist supports the violent overthrow of the government and a libertarian supports strict adherence to the Constitution.
I agree. There is no contract. I was only offering a "maybe" and the terms and conditions of such an agreement would be mutual non-violence ONLY. Nothing more.The "social contract" is a myth...It's alleged contents are completely under the subjective whims of whoever decides to describe it....The word "contract" presumes specifically delineated duties and obligations of all who assent to it...Your "contract" is nothing of the sort.
