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
17-08-2014, 06:21 PM (This post was last modified: 17-08-2014 06:25 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(17-08-2014 05:17 PM)PKJoe Wrote:  You didn't even give a hypothetical answer. You didn't answer my original question at all. Your issue regarding bad people being put into positions of watcher were addressed by both Evolution Kills and myself. You refuse to accept the answer. Everyone watches everybody is the solution that we have come up with. Everybody is subject to punishment regardless of their position. Police, government officials, military personnel, and private citizens can all be punished in some way. In addition each of these elements has watch power over at least one of the other segments. It's a system of checks-and-balances. Even within the government their are oversight boards, and separation of powers. Your fear of who is watching the watchers is totally unfounded and unsubstantiated. As a society, we have addressed that issue.
Yes, I do refuse to accept the answer. Time, money and power interests are more powerful than checks and balances, just like sexual urges are more powerful than biblical morality. There is of course the case of Obama, who can invade any country he wants and he can spy on anyone. The lawsuit for Obamacare is ridiculous compared to all that he did. This is why I don't believe in this formal crap anymore. Also, most other countries are just poor man's America. Huge public sector, lots of plutocrats, lots of laws and regulations and daily scandals.

Democracy is a binge of economic unreality. People begun to see the state as a source of wealth, instead of.... work and education for work. They think they can vote themselves a higher life standard - and politicians are only too willing to abide. They can increase taxation or print more money or both. The richest escape taxation and buy business privileges as laws and regulations that allow them to screw the customer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 06:28 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(17-08-2014 06:21 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 05:17 PM)PKJoe Wrote:  You didn't even give a hypothetical answer. You didn't answer my original question at all. Your issue regarding bad people being put into positions of watcher were addressed by both Evolution Kills and myself. You refuse to accept the answer. Everyone watches everybody is the solution that we have come up with. Everybody is subject to punishment regardless of their position. Police, government officials, military personnel, and private citizens can all be punished in some way. In addition each of these elements has watch power over at least one of the other segments. It's a system of checks-and-balances. Even within the government their are oversight boards, and separation of powers. Your fear of who is watching the watchers is totally unfounded and unsubstantiated. As a society, we have addressed that issue.
Yes, I do refuse to accept the answer. Time, money and power interests are more powerful than checks and balances, just like sexual urges are more powerful than biblical morality. There is of course the case of Obama, who can invade any country he wants and he can spy on anyone. The lawsuit for Obamacare is ridiculous compared to all that he did. This is why I don't believe in this formal crap anymore. Also, most other countries are just poor man's America. Huge public sector, lots of plutocrats, lots of laws and regulations and daily scandals.

Democracy is a binge of economic unreality. People begun to see the state as a source of wealth, instead of.... work and education for work. They think they can vote themselves a higher life standard - and politicians are only too willing to abide. They can increase taxation or print more money or both. The richest escape taxation and buy business privileges as laws and regulations that allow them to screw the customer.

Well, at least we can be thankful that you won't likely be coming here to annoy us. Thumbsup

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
18-08-2014, 12:54 AM (This post was last modified: 18-08-2014 01:02 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(17-08-2014 01:23 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 04:24 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Hooray for false equivocation and being purposely obtuse!

Both the police and the politicians are beholden to the public, they are public servants. Everyone can be fired, or jailed, and politicians can lose elections (so long as the consensus values and enforces equal protection under the law). It's up to the people to be vigilant in watching over those who watch over them. It's not a perpetual never-ending hierarchy, it's an inter-dependent system built upon checks and balances.

Now as opposed to anarchy where everyone just watches themselves with no oversight and zero accountability, this is a system built around negotiation and the forming of a consensus; with the understanding that by our own nature, everyone will be an outlier on some issue at some time. But almost all of them value the protection, stability, and accountability afforded when working together in a group.
I'm not obtuse, I refuse to be hoodwinked by skipping the basics. Prove it. Prove everything. I know there are institutions and guidelines on paper, but prove their usefulness.
Show me the scientific studies that prove that checks and balances are the best form of organizing society, and compared to what. I don't want to be stuck in some 18-19th century social theories made up by famous intellectuals that were never tested with science. Tocqueville my ass.

Oh, you mean unproven old theories like Classical Liberalism? Unfettered Capitalism? Laughat


(17-08-2014 01:23 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I could make a case for the completely non-capitalistic The Venus Project, which is based on engineering and behavioral science. I think that is more scientific than you rehashing Tocqueville, Locke and Hobbes. But for foreseeable time I'd prefer free market voluntarism, for which I see evidence in how the worldwide web behaves, especially the P2P applications.
I get really suspicious when people use modern phones with internet but insist on being ruled by centuries old ideologies. Drinking Beverage

Yeah, your anarchy utopia will work because the of the success of The Pirate Bay and uTorrent? Do you even read the shit you type? Weeping


(17-08-2014 01:23 PM)Luminon Wrote:  And please stop this false dichotomy that equates power structures with group cooperation. Voluntarism means to be free to cooperate in any way, while political power interferes and forbids certain kinds of cooperation, such as economic monopoly, which only we consumers can judge with their wallets. OTOH, power means inverse proportion to accountability. On the market, everyone is accountable to the customer, customer is the master. Power gets our money for nothing and produces nothing and we do not have the power to take our money back.

You have your head shoved so far up your axiomatic ass, you can't even stop and notice how the real world actually works and how people actually behave. It's like watching somebody interpret reality through the rules of the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop game, constantly watching them trying to explain reality through DC checks and d20 rolls because that's how it works in the book.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
18-08-2014, 01:00 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(17-08-2014 06:21 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 05:17 PM)PKJoe Wrote:  You didn't even give a hypothetical answer. You didn't answer my original question at all. Your issue regarding bad people being put into positions of watcher were addressed by both Evolution Kills and myself. You refuse to accept the answer. Everyone watches everybody is the solution that we have come up with. Everybody is subject to punishment regardless of their position. Police, government officials, military personnel, and private citizens can all be punished in some way. In addition each of these elements has watch power over at least one of the other segments. It's a system of checks-and-balances. Even within the government their are oversight boards, and separation of powers. Your fear of who is watching the watchers is totally unfounded and unsubstantiated. As a society, we have addressed that issue.
Yes, I do refuse to accept the answer. Time, money and power interests are more powerful than checks and balances, just like sexual urges are more powerful than biblical morality. There is of course the case of Obama, who can invade any country he wants and he can spy on anyone. The lawsuit for Obamacare is ridiculous compared to all that he did. This is why I don't believe in this formal crap anymore. Also, most other countries are just poor man's America. Huge public sector, lots of plutocrats, lots of laws and regulations and daily scandals.

Democracy is a binge of economic unreality. People begun to see the state as a source of wealth, instead of.... work and education for work. They think they can vote themselves a higher life standard - and politicians are only too willing to abide. They can increase taxation or print more money or both. The richest escape taxation and buy business privileges as laws and regulations that allow them to screw the customer.

And yet, even here, all you can do is point out the problems that arise when the systems stops being accountable; but they're not a problem with the core premises of the system itself. The system needs to be refined, but the system is also amenable to change. Lately it has changed for the worse, but that doesn't mean we can't change it again. Governments, much like their people, are constantly in flux. But you'd still rather burn it to the ground in favor of your imaginary wet-dream. Strangely (it must seem to you), nobody else finds that at all compelling... Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 01:23 AM (This post was last modified: 18-08-2014 01:43 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 01:00 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And yet, even here, all you can do is point out the problems that arise when the systems stops being accountable; but they're not a problem with the core premises of the system itself. The system needs to be refined, but the system is also amenable to change. Lately it has changed for the worse, but that doesn't mean we can't change it again. Governments, much like their people, are constantly in flux. But you'd still rather burn it to the ground in favor of your imaginary wet-dream. Strangely (it must seem to you), nobody else finds that at all compelling... Drinking Beverage
System. You keep using that word. I don't think you know what that means. No centralized system is safe, accountable and resistant to bad people getting to high places, that's just bad design. It's a design of fuckin' monarchy and imperialism that got slightly de-centralized through enormous effort of generations who wanted freedom but didn't know what the hell it is. They thought freedom is a monarch they can depose, or many lords in parliament. Most systems designed today are more and more distributed, from computing and banking to processor cores layout.
If you want to know something about the systems of rule, read this paper on constitutional development.
http://www2.cffn.ca/usha/part-iii-articl...ed-systems

The other things you say are just vague excuses that explain nothing. Also, "burned to the ground", that is a cheap and dirty sophist trick. Look at Hong Kong, that's one of the most unfettered capitalisms on the planet. If you like government so much, move to North Korea. Drinking Beverage
[Image: gmLOb.jpg]

Why should only some people represent checks and balances? Nothing says checks and balances better than every customer deciding about checks and banknotes! Mutual dependence of workers and customers is accountability, from the word accounting, which is a capitalist word.
[Image: Centralized-Decentralized-And-Distributed-System.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 01:38 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 01:23 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 01:00 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And yet, even here, all you can do is point out the problems that arise when the systems stops being accountable; but they're not a problem with the core premises of the system itself. The system needs to be refined, but the system is also amenable to change. Lately it has changed for the worse, but that doesn't mean we can't change it again. Governments, much like their people, are constantly in flux. But you'd still rather burn it to the ground in favor of your imaginary wet-dream. Strangely (it must seem to you), nobody else finds that at all compelling... Drinking Beverage
System. You keep using that word. I don't think you know what that means. No centralized system is safe, accountable and resistant to bad people getting to high places, that's just bad design. It's a design of fuckin' monarchy and imperialism that got slightly de-centralized through enormous effort of generations who wanted freedom but still believed in the system. Most systems designed today are more and more distributed, from computing and banking to processor cores layout.
If you want to know something about the systems of rule, read this paper on constitutional development.
http://www2.cffn.ca/usha/part-iii-articl...ed-systems

The other things you say are just vague excuses that explain nothing. Also, "burned to the ground", that is a cheap and dirty sophist trick. Look at Hong Kong, that's one of the most unfettered capitalisms on the planet. If you like government so much, move to North Korea. Drinking Beverage
[Image: gmLOb.jpg]

Nothing says checks and balances better than a free market network! Mutual dependence of workers and customers is accountability, from the word accounting, which is a capitalist word.
[Image: Centralized-Decentralized-And-Distributed-System.jpg]

Once again, Hong Kong doesn't exist in a bubble. And as it's also been pointed out before, that being situated at one of the most important coastal ports in China gave it a huge advantage that most other places simply do not have. Also, I do like the idea of government; which is why I'm involved in changing it. Thanks for noticing. You like anarchy? How about you move to Somalia dumbfuck?

In case you haven't noticed, you haven't said anything worth taking seriously in forever; so there is that. I just keep posting here because I'm bored, and it's so easy to poke fun at your bullshit.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
18-08-2014, 01:49 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 01:38 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 01:23 AM)Luminon Wrote:  System. You keep using that word. I don't think you know what that means. No centralized system is safe, accountable and resistant to bad people getting to high places, that's just bad design. It's a design of fuckin' monarchy and imperialism that got slightly de-centralized through enormous effort of generations who wanted freedom but still believed in the system. Most systems designed today are more and more distributed, from computing and banking to processor cores layout.
If you want to know something about the systems of rule, read this paper on constitutional development.
http://www2.cffn.ca/usha/part-iii-articl...ed-systems

The other things you say are just vague excuses that explain nothing. Also, "burned to the ground", that is a cheap and dirty sophist trick. Look at Hong Kong, that's one of the most unfettered capitalisms on the planet. If you like government so much, move to North Korea. Drinking Beverage
[Image: gmLOb.jpg]

Nothing says checks and balances better than a free market network! Mutual dependence of workers and customers is accountability, from the word accounting, which is a capitalist word.
[Image: Centralized-Decentralized-And-Distributed-System.jpg]

Once again, Hong Kong doesn't exist in a bubble. And as it's also been pointed out before, that being situated at one of the most important coastal ports in China gave it a huge advantage that most other places simply do not have. Also, I do like the idea of government; which is why I'm involved in changing it. Thanks for noticing. You like anarchy? How about you move to Somalia dumbfuck?

In case you haven't noticed, you haven't said anything worth taking seriously in forever; so there is that. I just keep posting here because I'm bored, and it's so easy to poke fun at your bullshit.

To add hong kong looks prettier and I would rather live there.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 02:02 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 01:38 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once again, Hong Kong doesn't exist in a bubble. And as it's also been pointed out before, that being situated at one of the most important coastal ports in China gave it a huge advantage that most other places simply do not have. Also, I do like the idea of government; which is why I'm involved in changing it. Thanks for noticing. You like anarchy? How about you move to Somalia dumbfuck?

In case you haven't noticed, you haven't said anything worth taking seriously in forever; so there is that. I just keep posting here because I'm bored, and it's so easy to poke fun at your bullshit.
"doesn't exist in a bubble" is not an argument. China gave Hong Kong the advantage of staying the fuck out, not exactly an argument for the government. It's interesting that people who don't know what arguments are, can't understand me.
Thinking you can change the government by playing the game is like thinking you can change the casino by winning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 02:20 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 02:02 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 01:38 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Once again, Hong Kong doesn't exist in a bubble. And as it's also been pointed out before, that being situated at one of the most important coastal ports in China gave it a huge advantage that most other places simply do not have. Also, I do like the idea of government; which is why I'm involved in changing it. Thanks for noticing. You like anarchy? How about you move to Somalia dumbfuck?

In case you haven't noticed, you haven't said anything worth taking seriously in forever; so there is that. I just keep posting here because I'm bored, and it's so easy to poke fun at your bullshit.
"doesn't exist in a bubble" is not an argument. China gave Hong Kong the advantage of staying the fuck out, not exactly an argument for the government. It's interesting that people who don't know what arguments are, can't understand me.
Thinking you can change the government by playing the game is like thinking you can change the casino by winning.

You stupid...

Will every place have the same economic and geographic advantages that Hong Kong has? No? Then you cannot hold them up as the shining example for your bullshit that you want to replace it with everywhere else. Hong Kong was going to be successful precisely because of it's prime location. Facepalm

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
18-08-2014, 02:37 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(18-08-2014 02:20 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You stupid...

Will every place have the same economic and geographic advantages that Hong Kong has? No? Then you cannot hold them up as the shining example for your bullshit that you want to replace it with everywhere else. Hong Kong was going to be successful precisely because of it's prime location. Facepalm
If you expect me to magically divine what economic and geographic advantages Hong Kong has, or what does the bubble mean, you're the one stupid here. I thought atheists don't believe in telepathy.

As far as I am concerned, the biggest economic advantage is simply no taxes or regulations and no government and no fighting or activist idiots trying to become the government. Ta dah! Instant tax paradise where people take their business. Every country should be a tax paradise, every zone a free trade zone. Because taxes don't increase productivity or life standard, taxes are like a slow theft, they make you wonder if you can move your business elsewhere, and the money with it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: