Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 34 of 34

Thread: Government Debate (off "Join Our Boys" Thread)

  1. #26
    Superplex Bro IronFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    The Crazy World of IronFury
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: Mephisto D
    I'm not even going to dignify the rest of your post with a response since you won't even acknowledge 330 million deaths in the 20th century at the hands of government.

    That is some pure fucking delusion.

    Did the Jews commit mass suicide? What about the famine of China or the acts of genocide in Soviet Russia? Did they just get together and think, "Nope, I don't feel like living anymore?" What about both world wars? Were those just sporting events by private parties?

    Again, how the hell do you sleep at night?

  2. #27
    Personal Trainer/IT-Guru Hikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Rivendell
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    19
    No, I can reckon that those tragic events happened while there was a government, I just don't draw a direct line between having a government and those being the consequences. If your point is that an anarchy without a government wouldn't have an army to their disposition (?), then I can't quite see that being a rational factor. Because frankly, nothing is keeping others with a different system, from building a national army. At such, a war could happen either way, as anarchy-capitalism is just an ideology, not something that can be forced upon the entire world population like a God hand.

  3. #28
    Superplex Bro IronFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    The Crazy World of IronFury
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: Mephisto D
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazuha View Post
    No, I can reckon that those tragic events happened while there was a government, I just don't draw a direct line between having a government and those being the consequences.
    It's called having the power to do that. You or I don't have that kind of power. Governments, however do claim that right and power.

    If your point is that an anarchy without a government wouldn't have an army to their disposition (?), then I can't quite see that being a rational factor. Because frankly, nothing is keeping others with a different system, from building a national army. At such, a war could happen either way, as anarchy-capitalism is just an ideology, not something that can be forced upon the entire world population like a God hand.
    The idea behind anarcho-capitalism isn't that violence will never happen. It's the idea that we won't give it the same excuses that people give the state. Coercion is coercion is coercion is coercion.

    @bold: It's not forced upon. That's the entire point. Governments are force.

  4. #29
    Personal Trainer/IT-Guru Hikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Rivendell
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    19
    And if the force is mainly for something good, why resist it? it's like swimming against the stream, instead of using it to propel you forwards.

  5. #30
    I am Me. Electrorocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    The Electrorocket Estate
    Posts
    489
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    23
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: Electrocket2 Steam ID: Electrorocket2
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazuha View Post
    And if the force is mainly for something good, why resist it? it's like swimming against the stream, instead of using it to propel you forwards.
    I don't agree with you.

    That means I want to fight you.

    Fighting is bad, but it's done anyway.

    Fighting is done because something is either too good or not good.

    Whether a government exists or not, it will always be bad, but it will always be good because of both the government and the people in the land of which that government is of.


    This is dumb. I'm going to go make my own thread.


    "This is Adolf Reinhart." - Narrator for Terra Formars
    My Youtube Channel

  6. #31
    Personal Trainer/IT-Guru Hikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Rivendell
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    19
    Lmao, the use of the word force, actually made me consider the analogy of Jedis and Sith lords, but I decided to not use it to stay somewhat serious.

    While IronFury did not want me to use it, I will still use a classic term from the field of sosiology, to explain why a government is good. It's called the social contract. Briefly explained, it states that if all people had been enlightened, then they would have seen that a government is for the good of all of us, and they would not have been forced into joining it, because they would want to join it. Because anyone enlightened will see that living in a society has its benefits compared to being uncivilized. As long as you believe in enlightenment, then you should be able to believe in a government.

    The question you are asking is actually one of the most discussed topics in philosophy and sosiology, from the times of Platon (400 B.C.) till today.

  7. #32
    Superplex Bro IronFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    The Crazy World of IronFury
    Posts
    39
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    PSN ID: Mephisto D
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazuha View Post
    And if the force is mainly for something good, why resist it? it's like swimming against the stream, instead of using it to propel you forwards.
    Wow. You don't have a right to use force against others because YOU think it's for their own good, and you can go fuck yourself for thinking you do. Not only are you a fucking sociopath, but a narcissistic one to boot. Who the fuck are you to determine what is better for other people? You are easily the biggest piece of shit I've ever run into on an anime forum, and considering I was on SI for many years, that says a real fucking lot.

    Lmao, the use of the word force, actually made me consider the analogy of Jedis and Sith lords, but I decided to not use it to stay somewhat serious.
    If it's the bullshit quote about "absolutes" then I can tell you that's an absolute statement in and of itself.

    While IronFury did not want me to use it, I will still use a classic term from the field of sociology, to explain why a government is good. It's called the social contract. Briefly explained, it states that if all people had been enlightened, then they would have seen that a government is for the good of all of us, and they would not have been forced into joining it, because they would want to join it. Because anyone enlightened will see that living in a society has its benefits compared to being uncivilized. As long as you believe in enlightenment, then you should be able to believe in a government.
    Bald assertions. Bald assertions EVERYWHERE. With that logic, you could justify anything.

    "If all people had been enlightened, they would have seen that rape is for the good of all of us, and they would not have been forced into taking it, because they would want to take it, because anyone enlightened will see that getting fucked in the ass has its benefits compared to not having a dick in your asshole."

    "If the Jews had been enlightened, they would have seen that the Holocaust is for the good of all of us, and they would not have been forced into being victims of it, because they would want to be victims of it, because any Jew enlightened will see that getting killed off has its benefits compared to being allowed to live."

    "If the Africans had been enlightened, they would have seen that picking cotton is for the good of all of us, and they would not have been forced into slavery, because they would want to pick cotton, because any African enlightened will see that picking cotton has its benefits compared to not picking cotton."

    Also, not having government =/= being uncivilized or not living in society. That's a straw man argument.

    Murray Rothbard also refuted this argument in his book "The Ethics of Liberty."


    You know what you are? You're a statist of convenience. Clearly, you've never been inconvenienced too much by the state, and you're so self-centered that you can't see what the fuss is all about.

  8. #33
    Personal Trainer/IT-Guru Hikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Rivendell
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    19
    Wow there. I am not the only one determining that. I am part of a democracy. It is the will of the people. I am against dictatorships, which by the way, I would deem closer to anarchists than a democracy is. I have no idea how you arrive at the conclusion that under an anarchy, where there are warlords sitting on top commanding, will be any less forceful than a government. Their authority is just not scripted into any official institution, but even more so, they are not as limited in ways of which they can abuse you - and more dominating and ultimate so. You want a world without leaders, but that's simply not going to happen.

    You claim me as a sosiopath and narcissist for my view, which is the most common view in existence. I suppose that means the majority of the population are in fact sosiopaths and narcissists. Hard to believe.

    The social contract, as I'm sure you are aware of, is a general claim supported by the fundaments - the multitude of arguments. It is a theory, not a law, but throughout milleniums there has been a vary vast majority of societies which hold it to be true. In my opinion, it is a true statement, because I find the arguments for a government more compelling than not having one. For the majority of the world, it is a true statement. That it is a general statement that could be used for most else, has no value, when it's the arguments behind that specific claim which defines its quality.

    I am a statist of convencience, because having a state benefits me and society. Clearly. You seem to be very decisive, extreme in your view of state government. You do not recognize that government can co-exist perfectly with your economic freedom, and that its influence can be altered from very limited and insignificant to very broad and significant. You defy having a government out of idealism, that you do not want to be ruled in any shape or sort whatsoever, but ignore the practicalities that a well ruling government has. Likewise, you could make a counter-claim that you are only against government because you feel it has inconvenienced you. Your idealism falls apart, when practicality answers that it is a superior choice to benefit the public. Anarchy is for the strong only, making room for uncontrolled abuse, whereas government tries to deny that. It's a positive thing, no matter how you go about it. A government is there to serve, not to lament.

    Please, I pledge of you to join TWF and post your views there. If you are not afraid of taking the discussion, as you are confident about your views, then there should be no harm, right?
    Last edited by Hikaru; 07-23-2014 at 02:30 PM.

  9. #34
    Yeah, I am going to be closing this thread. I really wish not to give any infractions this soon so just going to close the thread and leave it at that.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •