Socialism and the purpose of government

[Harpy Eagle]

Bullshit....I didn't assent to jack shit....The gumbint was in place when I was born, and I was given no choice as to whether I would accept and acquiesce to it.

You missed the point.

Having a mutual assent to rules of a society is a government. In other words, such an existence is NOT anarchy.

The overall point is that anarchy is impossible.

.

You keep saying that, but offer no proof.

P.S. Begging the question isn't proof.

The proof is that is has never existed.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You keep saying that, but offer no proof.

P.S. Begging the question isn't proof.

I can't prove a negative.

Prove that anarchy is possible.

You can't.

.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You can also have mutual assent to rules without government. Again, I refer you to the common law.

Up util people choose to ignore the rules and then there is no recourse without force, and force is bad according to you.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Maybe this will help...the meaning of the word anarchy...a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

The fact that escapes the anarchists is that the vacuum created by such an absence is more powerful than 50 million hoovers. Almost IMMEDIATELY, a form of authority will emerge.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Up util people choose to ignore the rules and then there is no recourse without force, and force is bad according to you.

And government is force. How such force is used determines the "good" or "bad" element.

 

[Tehon]

Yes, I agree. It is the same fantasy that a society can exist with any authority...

Which is why I always say that Karl Marx was wrong and a dumbass (among other reasons) when he said that socialism would eventually lead to communism. The exact reverse is true.

Communism (a stateless form of existence where the community owns everything) is a form of anarchy, but the distribution of labor and resources must be controlled or conflict will tear the community apart. How will this community administer these distributions? GOVERNMENT, which will own and control such distributions on behalf of the people (socialism).

Community governance is a far cry from a state.

Marx said the state would dissolve, not government.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Marx said the state would dissolve, not government.

How did Marx define "state" in his moronic ramblings?

 

[bripat9643]

I said without government, not without "authority," whatever you believe that means. The former has happened, and it can happen again.

The former only happens when you narrow the definition of government to something to specific it will fit in your box.

Maybe this will help...the meaning of the word anarchy...a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

I use the definition appropriate. You want to use a different definition that allows you weasel out of your bogus claims.

Mirriam Webster:
Definition of anarchy
1a : absence of government

 

[dblack]

With socialism no government is needed, if the people are willing.

Same with anarchy, eh?

 

[bripat9643]

You can also have mutual assent to rules without government. Again, I refer you to the common law.

Up util people choose to ignore the rules and then there is no recourse without force, and force is bad according to you.

Why should I be required to assent to your rules?

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, I agree. It is the same fantasy that a society can exist with any authority...

Which is why I always say that Karl Marx was wrong and a dumbass (among other reasons) when he said that socialism would eventually lead to communism. The exact reverse is true.

Communism (a stateless form of existence where the community owns everything) is a form of anarchy, but the distribution of labor and resources must be controlled or conflict will tear the community apart. How will this community administer these distributions? GOVERNMENT, which will own and control such distributions on behalf of the people (socialism).

Community governance is a far cry from a state.

Marx said the state would dissolve, not government.

How does this "community government" work? How would it manufacture motorcars?

 

[bripat9643]

Maybe this will help...the meaning of the word anarchy...a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

The fact that escapes the anarchists is that the vacuum created by such an absence is more powerful than 50 million hoovers. Almost IMMEDIATELY, a form of authority will emerge.

That depends on how it emerges.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Mirriam Webster:
Definition of anarchy
1a : absence of government

Again, that has never occurred.

 

[bripat9643]

You can also have mutual assent to rules without government. Again, I refer you to the common law.

Up util people choose to ignore the rules and then there is no recourse without force, and force is bad according to you.

So you admit your claims about "mutual assent" are pure bullshit. Compulsion is what is in play here.

 

[bripat9643]

Bullshit....I didn't assent to jack shit....The gumbint was in place when I was born, and I was given no choice as to whether I would accept and acquiesce to it.

You missed the point.

Having a mutual assent to rules of a society is a government. In other words, such an existence is NOT anarchy.

The overall point is that anarchy is impossible.

.

You keep saying that, but offer no proof.

P.S. Begging the question isn't proof.

The proof is that is has never existed.

No, that's not true. Democracy never existed until 350 BCE when the Greeks invented it.

 

[bripat9643]

Mirriam Webster:
Definition of anarchy
1a : absence of government

Again, that has never occurred.

Sure it has. What government existed prior to 4000 BC?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No, that's not true. Democracy never existed until 350 BCE when the Greeks invented it.

Democracy is a form of government.

There is no evidence of an absence of government in human history.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Sure it has. What government existed prior to 4000 BC?

You can't say that none existed because neither of us know what happened in pre-historic times.

 

[Tehon]

Marx said the state would dissolve, not government.

How did Marx define "state" in his moronic ramblings?

All forms of the state have democracy for their truth, and for that reason are false to the extent that they are not democracy.
Notes for a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, by Karl Marx


Freedom consists in converting the state from an organ superimposed upon society into one completely subordinate to it.......

That, in fact, by the word "state" is meant the government machine, or the state insofar as it forms a special organism separated from society through division of labor......
Critique of the Gotha Programme-- IV

 

[bripat9643]

Sure it has. What government existed prior to 4000 BC?

You can't say that none existed because neither of us know what happened in pre-historic times.

We can be fairly confident that no government existed.