Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-08-2014, 12:04 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(09-08-2014 09:19 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(09-08-2014 02:43 PM)morondog Wrote:  So we should tear down the system of law and order and replace it with no law and no order and we will be freeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

You do realise that under the current system if you find a law to be unjust you can actually challenge *that specific law*? It might be a long, costly process, but it's a hell of a lot cheaper than deconstructing society, which if you've been following the thread, is apparently the cure-all pill.

Hmmm. Is that what I said? It doesn't look like that's what I said. I'm not sure what you are reading but I don't think you read anything I said.
I can't help but wonder how my advocacy for drug legalization translates into me supporting lawlessness. Perhaps you can explain it to me?
You see the choices are not 'keep drugs illegal' or 'completely destroy law and order.' The world isn't so black and white or simplistic.
I fully realize what it might take to change laws and I personally said nothing about deconstructing society. So I will simply ask; wtf are you talking about?

You contributed to a thread. The content of the thread to date has been about anarchism. I assumed you replied in the context of the thread.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
10-08-2014, 03:00 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(09-08-2014 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sorry, not true. Opiate addiction is very real and happens to healthy people. This has been well-studied in medical settings.
Prolonged use of opiates for pain management will often result in addiction.
Wonderful! Pain management is not a social problem, it's the emotional pain management that the tax and drug mafias prey upon.

(09-08-2014 09:19 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(09-08-2014 02:43 PM)morondog Wrote:  So we should tear down the system of law and order and replace it with no law and no order and we will be freeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

You do realise that under the current system if you find a law to be unjust you can actually challenge *that specific law*? It might be a long, costly process, but it's a hell of a lot cheaper than deconstructing society, which if you've been following the thread, is apparently the cure-all pill.

Hmmm. Is that what I said? It doesn't look like that's what I said. I'm not sure what you are reading but I don't think you read anything I said.
I can't help but wonder how my advocacy for drug legalization translates into me supporting lawlessness. Perhaps you can explain it to me?
You see the choices are not 'keep drugs illegal' or 'completely destroy law and order.' The world isn't so black and white or simplistic.
I fully realize what it might take to change laws and I personally said nothing about deconstructing society. So I will simply ask; wtf are you talking about?
Good point. I was talking about private securities paid by street or town fundraising, insurance companies and Dispute Resolution Organizations. I'm not sure how that translates to lawlessness either, in Morondogs' mind.
I think lawlessness is when there are many laws, but politicians and policemen are above law. And when they actively protect the market of mafia. Meth is easy to cook and addicts could cook it themselves or buy it at the price of aspirin. Meanwhile they could attend psychotherapy and be known to their insurance companies and DROs.
(09-08-2014 09:40 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Both irrelevant. Why does it matter how addictive shit is. If someone is dumb enough to continue to do the heavy shit that's their problem.
If I want to shoot myself shouldn't that be my right? If I want to kill myself slowly shouldn't that also be my right. My life. My body. My choice.
As I said I don't support all(perhaps not eve most, I dunno) libertarian ideas but this is one where I have made up my mind and it's doubtful I will change it.
It's not about dumbness, but you're right. If someone is damaging their body with drugs, it won't do to damage their body even more by police shooting or by bending over in prison showers.
Of course in a free society many people would be interested in this problem and would seek to save money on insurance and medical expenses by working with these people and preventing the social causes of addiction, which are well-known. I think free market would find many ways to make profit on peaceful prevention of drug abuse. Free market doesn't reward unhealthy choices as much as government-subsidized market. And drug mafia is de facto government-subsidized.

(09-08-2014 10:34 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  I'm just glad the group in this thread wasn't the group writing the U.S. Constitution...or any constitutions for that matter. Imagine if the conversations over that were anything like this....haha...ohh anyways, don't mind me.
[Image: Lysander-Spooner-Quotes-1.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 03:08 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 03:00 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Good point. I was talking about private securities paid by street or town fundraising, insurance companies and Dispute Resolution Organizations. I'm not sure how that translates to lawlessness either, in Morondogs' mind.
So you never advocated doing away with the law? Just fundamentally changing the way law works to the point where calling it law is a traversty. Powered by bunny rabbits. In Luminon's mind ™.

Quote:I think lawlessness is when there are many laws, but politicians and policemen are above law. And when they actively protect the market of mafia. Meth is easy to cook and addicts could cook it themselves or buy it at the price of aspirin. Meanwhile they could attend psychotherapy and be known to their insurance companies and DROs.
And you too want to be above the law and not pay your taxes Smile Now you're moaning about corrupt politicians and policemen, but you don't want to pay your share to make a working police force or political system. Instead you want to replace them with private security which a. will only be available to those who can afford it b. will not be any less corrupt.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 03:15 AM
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 03:00 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(09-08-2014 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sorry, not true. Opiate addiction is very real and happens to healthy people. This has been well-studied in medical settings.
Prolonged use of opiates for pain management will often result in addiction.
Wonderful! Pain management is not a social problem, it's the emotional pain management that the tax and drug mafias prey upon.

(09-08-2014 09:19 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Hmmm. Is that what I said? It doesn't look like that's what I said. I'm not sure what you are reading but I don't think you read anything I said.
I can't help but wonder how my advocacy for drug legalization translates into me supporting lawlessness. Perhaps you can explain it to me?
You see the choices are not 'keep drugs illegal' or 'completely destroy law and order.' The world isn't so black and white or simplistic.
I fully realize what it might take to change laws and I personally said nothing about deconstructing society. So I will simply ask; wtf are you talking about?
Good point. I was talking about private securities paid by street or town fundraising, insurance companies and Dispute Resolution Organizations. I'm not sure how that translates to lawlessness either, in Morondogs' mind.
I think lawlessness is when there are many laws, but politicians and policemen are above law. And when they actively protect the market of mafia. Meth is easy to cook and addicts could cook it themselves or buy it at the price of aspirin. Meanwhile they could attend psychotherapy and be known to their insurance companies and DROs.
(09-08-2014 09:40 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Both irrelevant. Why does it matter how addictive shit is. If someone is dumb enough to continue to do the heavy shit that's their problem.
If I want to shoot myself shouldn't that be my right? If I want to kill myself slowly shouldn't that also be my right. My life. My body. My choice.
As I said I don't support all(perhaps not eve most, I dunno) libertarian ideas but this is one where I have made up my mind and it's doubtful I will change it.
It's not about dumbness, but you're right. If someone is damaging their body with drugs, it won't do to damage their body even more by police shooting or by bending over in prison showers.
Of course in a free society many people would be interested in this problem and would seek to save money on insurance and medical expenses by working with these people and preventing the social causes of addiction, which are well-known. I think free market would find many ways to make profit on peaceful prevention of drug abuse. Free market doesn't reward unhealthy choices as much as government-subsidized market. And drug mafia is de facto government-subsidized.

(09-08-2014 10:34 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  I'm just glad the group in this thread wasn't the group writing the U.S. Constitution...or any constitutions for that matter. Imagine if the conversations over that were anything like this....haha...ohh anyways, don't mind me.
[Image: Lysander-Spooner-Quotes-1.jpg]

You're still fairly new on this planet, man. For that matter so am I. If I may make a suggestion:

Before suggesting the complete dismantling of everything your predecessors have built which took hundreds of years to accomplish, why not take the cautious path and familiarize yourself with the history of government? Examine the path of those who came before you in order to understand the reasons governments are in the state they are in today.

American government isn't perfect, despite what some (most) Texans may say. But there are reasons behind its structure. Look at the England we fled (not the one today, 17th century). Look at all we've lived through here: revolution, tax fraud, slavery, civil war and more. Laws have history. There were events that transpired which led to laws, just of not.

Now is not the time for a do-over. We have something good to work with already. Of course, I know a lot less about the political situation in Czech Republic.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 04:18 AM (This post was last modified: 10-08-2014 04:42 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 03:15 AM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  You're still fairly new on this planet, man. For that matter so am I. If I may make a suggestion:

Before suggesting the complete dismantling of everything your predecessors have built which took hundreds of years to accomplish, why not take the cautious path and familiarize yourself with the history of government? Examine the path of those who came before you in order to understand the reasons governments are in the state they are in today.

American government isn't perfect, despite what some (most) Texans may say. But there are reasons behind its structure. Look at the England we fled (not the one today, 17th century). Look at all we've lived through here: revolution, tax fraud, slavery, civil war and more. Laws have history. There were events that transpired which led to laws, just of not.

Now is not the time for a do-over. We have something good to work with already. Of course, I know a lot less about the political situation in Czech Republic.

Dodgy You know that I'm a bachelor of law and a student of historical sociology, right? Well, now you know. But whatever knowledge I have, it pales in comparison to the awesome world-shaping power of philosophy. So I know there are no good, objective arguments for having a government. I could make a good case for bubonic plague the way you do. But I deleted it, I didn't want to be disrespectful.

You're aware that you're not making any argument, right? "Is not perfect but" is not an argument. But if your arguments aren't good, it only means you have other causes to prefer something you would never ever buy on a free market. Powerful emotional causes. And I can't deal with these, that is an olympic discipline, BDSM or an adrenaline sport, depends on how you look at it.
So I'll take the quick and dirty road: How were you disciplined as a child? How was your first encounter with authority?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 04:57 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 03:00 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(09-08-2014 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sorry, not true. Opiate addiction is very real and happens to healthy people. This has been well-studied in medical settings.
Prolonged use of opiates for pain management will often result in addiction.
Wonderful! Pain management is not a social problem, it's the emotional pain management that the tax and drug mafias prey upon.

What the actual fuck are you talking about?

You made a bogus statement about addiction and I pointed that out. What has that to do with drug mafias?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
10-08-2014, 05:10 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 04:18 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(10-08-2014 03:15 AM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  You're still fairly new on this planet, man. For that matter so am I. If I may make a suggestion:

Before suggesting the complete dismantling of everything your predecessors have built which took hundreds of years to accomplish, why not take the cautious path and familiarize yourself with the history of government? Examine the path of those who came before you in order to understand the reasons governments are in the state they are in today.

American government isn't perfect, despite what some (most) Texans may say. But there are reasons behind its structure. Look at the England we fled (not the one today, 17th century). Look at all we've lived through here: revolution, tax fraud, slavery, civil war and more. Laws have history. There were events that transpired which led to laws, just of not.

Now is not the time for a do-over. We have something good to work with already. Of course, I know a lot less about the political situation in Czech Republic.

Dodgy You know that I'm a bachelor of law and a student of historical sociology, right? Well, now you know. But whatever knowledge I have, it pales in comparison to the awesome world-shaping power of philosophy. So I know there are no good, objective arguments for having a government. I could make a good case for bubonic plague the way you do. But I deleted it, I didn't want to be disrespectful.

You're aware that you're not making any argument, right? "Is not perfect but" is not an argument. But if your arguments aren't good, it only means you have other causes to prefer something you would never ever buy on a free market. Powerful emotional causes. And I can't deal with these, that is an olympic discipline, BDSM or an adrenaline sport, depends on how you look at it.
So I'll take the quick and dirty road: How were you disciplined as a child? How was your first encounter with authority?

What? Lysander Spooner embodies all of philosophy? Really? Consider
He didn't exactly shape the world.

You have yet to demonstrate that child discipline has any effect on political outlook.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 07:15 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 04:57 AM)Chas Wrote:  What the actual fuck are you talking about?

You made a bogus statement about addiction and I pointed that out. What has that to do with drug mafias?
Rolleyes I did not expect that you would interpret my statement in a way that healthy people are impervious to drugs. I have never claimed that. All I meant was, healthy people will not be irresistibly drawn to drugs when they casually try them. If a healthy person gets injury and is in pain, and then takes drugs regularly, then obviously the drug will reshape his brain chemistry. But the debate is about mass social phenomena such as politics and drug policy, not individual injuries.


(10-08-2014 05:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  What? Lysander Spooner embodies all of philosophy? Really? Consider
He didn't exactly shape the world.

You have yet to demonstrate that child discipline has any effect on political outlook.
No, his philosophy embodies anarchism, but he certainly did avoid the mistakes of Plato and Kant in accepting power as an argument. Politics and state is based on philosophy, because it is used to justify everything. But all justifications of government and aggression are fallacious.

And when it comes to demonstrating, here's the Journal of Psychohistory.
http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/01_journal.html
Is it so difficult to believe that parental authority creates the deference pattern in our brain, later exploited by state or church authority? If we are forced accept violence against us from parents, we will accept violence from any authority. Of course, absence of spanking must also be correlated with compulsory public school attendance, this may also cause pro-political views. 9-13 years under the state must have its effect.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 08:35 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 12:04 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(09-08-2014 09:19 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Hmmm. Is that what I said? It doesn't look like that's what I said. I'm not sure what you are reading but I don't think you read anything I said.
I can't help but wonder how my advocacy for drug legalization translates into me supporting lawlessness. Perhaps you can explain it to me?
You see the choices are not 'keep drugs illegal' or 'completely destroy law and order.' The world isn't so black and white or simplistic.
I fully realize what it might take to change laws and I personally said nothing about deconstructing society. So I will simply ask; wtf are you talking about?

You contributed to a thread. The content of the thread to date has been about anarchism. I assumed you replied in the context of the thread.

I kinda did. I was pointing out that while I don't fully agree with it I do see merit is some of the ideas. Mostly ideas involving personal responsibility. I'm somewhere in the middle. Living in the grey reality.
Consider this. If you don't agree that drugs should be illegal then I will accuse you of being totalitarian. You obviously hate freedom. Ridicules you say?
Well yes it is. But it no different than you accusing me of wanting to deconstruct society simply because I advocate for legalization.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 12:21 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(10-08-2014 08:35 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(10-08-2014 12:04 AM)morondog Wrote:  You contributed to a thread. The content of the thread to date has been about anarchism. I assumed you replied in the context of the thread.

I kinda did. I was pointing out that while I don't fully agree with it I do see merit is some of the ideas. Mostly ideas involving personal responsibility. I'm somewhere in the middle. Living in the grey reality.
Consider this. If you don't agree that drugs should be illegal then I will accuse you of being totalitarian. You obviously hate freedom. Ridicules you say?
Well yes it is. But it no different than you accusing me of wanting to deconstruct society simply because I advocate for legalization.

Pax. I jumped on you without due cause, you growled. I also think legalizing drugs would solve a lot of problems.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: