Political Insight: Set Me Straight
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-07-2013, 07:24 AM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Because pointing guns at people (using government), or simply having that threat available, and forcing them to do or not do what a particular group of people say is the "right thing" is so much better?

So your answer to a totalitarian extreme is another, unsustainable extreme?

(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  It's so much better for the governments to use coercion give special privileges to corporations, labor unions, favored political parties, minority groups (in the present), slaveowners (in the past), religious groups (e.g. tax exemptions), and whatever group those in power tend to favor at a given time?

You have described the function of the United States government. You have not described the function of all government. Applying your pathetic absolute to foreign federal agencies simply because you have only experienced crony capitalism is absurd. If you want to bitch about corporations owning people, then supporting small government is the most moronic, asinine thing to do.

(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  It's better for the governments to throw persons in cages who have done no harm to other persons (pot smokers, gamblers, etc.), or those who happen to be the wrong race (Japanese persons in the USA in the 1940s), to suppress free speech (numerous examples around the world) and in extreme cases to slaughter their own citizens (again, numerous examples around the world)?

Nice illogical leap there, skipper. Cool story though.

(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Fuck that.

Yes, indeed. Fuck your entire argument, because so far, it was entirely baseless.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-07-2013, 07:46 AM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Because pointing guns at people (using government), or simply having that threat available, and forcing them to do or not do what a particular group of people say is the "right thing" is so much better?

So your answer to a totalitarian extreme is another, unsustainable extreme?

I favor non-violence. I favor peaceful interactions between people. That's the essence of libertarianism. I work towards that goal. I don't see "extreme non-coercion" is any worse than "extreme health" or "extreme niceness" or anything of that sort.

As people in society improve (less racism, less sexism, less overall bigotry, more logic, more reason) I don't see any reason why a libertarian government would be unsustainable. It's not a utopia. Humans are fallible and there will always be problems. That doesn't mean it's not the best solution.

(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  It's so much better for the governments to use coercion give special privileges to corporations, labor unions, favored political parties, minority groups (in the present), slaveowners (in the past), religious groups (e.g. tax exemptions), and whatever group those in power tend to favor at a given time?

You have described the function of the United States government. You have not described the function of all government. Applying your pathetic absolute to foreign federal agencies simply because you have only experienced crony capitalism is absurd. If you want to bitch about corporations owning people, then supporting small government is the most moronic, asinine thing to do.

Keep in mind that corporations are given their special privileges by the government, and they use their money to influence government to keep themselves in power.

You, as far as I can tell, favor using coercion to make people "do the right thing." Government acts are coercive - if you don't comply, they'll either take your money (via fines) or throw you in a cage (jail/prison).

Any government that one takes a look at tends to favor one group over another. In Islamic countries, governments favor men over women (by a lot), and have rules that say coercion against other people is perfectly acceptable for ridiculous reasons (e.g. "honor killings"). In western European countries, they tend to favor employees over employers, enforcing mandatory rules that employers must follow regardless of whether the employer and employee want to do anything different. That applies to the USA too, but often in the states, special privileges are given to "both sides" (corporations and labor unions) and there's a constant battle in legislatures as to who should get more power.

Governments that favor one group of persons over another (either by granting special privileges or prohibiting certain actions) are coercively giving power to one group. I disagree with that approach.

(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(15-07-2013 07:19 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  It's better for the governments to throw persons in cages who have done no harm to other persons (pot smokers, gamblers, etc.), or those who happen to be the wrong race (Japanese persons in the USA in the 1940s), to suppress free speech (numerous examples around the world) and in extreme cases to slaughter their own citizens (again, numerous examples around the world)?

Nice illogical leap there, skipper. Cool story though.

Nice non-response to the horrors that governments have committed throughout history.


Please explain to me why coercion is the best way for humans to interact.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-07-2013, 09:30 AM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 04:39 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(15-07-2013 04:06 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  And I thank god every day for that.
But my point still remains.

Laws can be amended to allow foreigners to become president.
Doesn't mean it should/will happen though, but the point that that could happen remains.

















boom.

I can guarantee that it won't. Well, it won't while you are still alive.








And you will fuckin' die.









Boom.

So will you.










Boom. Drinking Beverage

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-07-2013, 09:34 AM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  
(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  So your answer to a totalitarian extreme is another, unsustainable extreme?

I favor non-violence. I favor peaceful interactions between people. That's the essence of libertarianism. I work towards that goal. I don't see "extreme non-coercion" is any worse than "extreme health" or "extreme niceness" or anything of that sort.

As people in society improve (less racism, less sexism, less overall bigotry, more logic, more reason) I don't see any reason why a libertarian government would be unsustainable. It's not a utopia. Humans are fallible and there will always be problems. That doesn't mean it's not the best solution.

(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  You have described the function of the United States government. You have not described the function of all government. Applying your pathetic absolute to foreign federal agencies simply because you have only experienced crony capitalism is absurd. If you want to bitch about corporations owning people, then supporting small government is the most moronic, asinine thing to do.

Keep in mind that corporations are given their special privileges by the government, and they use their money to influence government to keep themselves in power.

You, as far as I can tell, favor using coercion to make people "do the right thing." Government acts are coercive - if you don't comply, they'll either take your money (via fines) or throw you in a cage (jail/prison).

Any government that one takes a look at tends to favor one group over another. In Islamic countries, governments favor men over women (by a lot), and have rules that say coercion against other people is perfectly acceptable for ridiculous reasons (e.g. "honor killings"). In western European countries, they tend to favor employees over employers, enforcing mandatory rules that employers must follow regardless of whether the employer and employee want to do anything different. That applies to the USA too, but often in the states, special privileges are given to "both sides" (corporations and labor unions) and there's a constant battle in legislatures as to who should get more power.

Governments that favor one group of persons over another (either by granting special privileges or prohibiting certain actions) are coercively giving power to one group. I disagree with that approach.

(15-07-2013 07:24 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Nice illogical leap there, skipper. Cool story though.

Nice non-response to the horrors that governments have committed throughout history.


Please explain to me why coercion is the best way for humans to interact.



Oh please, cry more because you don't like paying taxes.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like earmuffs's post
15-07-2013, 02:33 PM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  I'll be honest: I know absolutely fuck-all about politics. When two white-haired guys in business suits sit down at a table on TV and start talking to one another about G.O.Ps and "fiscal cliffs" and "teaparty rallies" and that god-awful "Obamacare", I completely zone out.
You're a good writer and good writers make good use of ideas and falsehoods, as you do in this essay.

(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  Up until recently, I was ok with this. Politics annoy me. Thus far, my personal motto has been - and will certainly continue to be - "Man is not fit to lead man, for both men are inherently fallible". True words. But while politics may be a laughable attempt on the part of Man to lead itself succsessfully, I find myself faced more and more with the realities of political discourse.
The problem that you are missing is that the best governing systems are based on very dated technology - as is that amusing anecdote you use to describe yourself.

(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  I can fuckin' dominate the hell out of a religious conversation.
Why do you want to be so dominate in such conversations when the possible outcome always includes god's will???

(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  But this is not the case with politics. Until this point, I've intentionally distanced myself from this topic because I just think it's all bullshit, and even now I feel a measure of reserve in even asking these questions. But they're things I'd like to know.

1) What the fuck is a "liberal"?
A liberal is a person who recognizes that the political system is corrupt, and rather than attempting to fix the system, they only want to take advantage of the system to impose their flawed agenda of pie in the sky equality and wealth redistribution for stupid people.

(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  2) What the fuck is a "conservative"?
A conservative is a person who recognizes that the political system is corrupt, and does not know how to fix the system, because they have been told over and over again that the Constitution is the greatest thing written since the Bible.

(10-07-2013 04:30 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  But, surely, I can't be entirely correct in this. I know there exist perfectly reasonable, right-wing atheists who want social freedom just as much as any other rational person.
I am the only reasonable atheist.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-07-2013, 03:15 PM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
Haha! TrainWreck is back, and in full force!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Light's post
16-07-2013, 03:26 AM (This post was last modified: 16-07-2013 03:31 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  I favor non-violence. I favor peaceful interactions between people. That's the essence of libertarianism. I work towards that goal. I don't see "extreme non-coercion" is any worse than "extreme health" or "extreme niceness" or anything of that sort.

That is Pacifism, not Libertarianism. Libertarianism is the foolish belief that deregulation would actually result in a better society, even though that is demonstrably false.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  As people in society improve (less racism, less sexism, less overall bigotry, more logic, more reason) I don't see any reason why a libertarian government would be unsustainable. It's not a utopia. Humans are fallible and there will always be problems. That doesn't mean it's not the best solution.

It is the best solution we have. The government is a balance between public and corporate interest. Just because the American government system was designed prior to industrialization, thereby rendering the check and balance systems obsolete in twenty years, does not mean that government as a whole needs to be smaller. The United States needs a restructured, larger government.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Keep in mind that corporations are given their special privileges by the government, and they use their money to influence government to keep themselves in power.

No, corporations currently own your government. Corporations are, effectively, your government. It has been that way for forty years, just as it was during the Gilded Age.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  You, as far as I can tell, favor using coercion to make people "do the right thing." Government acts are coercive - if you don't comply, they'll either take your money (via fines) or throw you in a cage (jail/prison).

Coercion is the basic driving motivator in universal social interaction. The difference is that in the westernized world, the people are to control what the government does. While the United States has been flailing around with its horrible rightist extreme, the rest of the western world has already realized what must be done.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Any government that one takes a look at tends to favor one group over another. In Islamic countries, governments favor men over women (by a lot), and have rules that say coercion against other people is perfectly acceptable for ridiculous reasons (e.g. "honor killings"). In western European countries, they tend to favor employees over employers, enforcing mandatory rules that employers must follow regardless of whether the employer and employee want to do anything different. That applies to the USA too, but often in the states, special privileges are given to "both sides" (corporations and labor unions) and there's a constant battle in legislatures as to who should get more power.

No, European nations keep corporations and employers in check so they cannot turn the government into what the U.S' is. They give workers their most basic rights, unlike the United States.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Governments that favor one group of persons over another (either by granting special privileges or prohibiting certain actions) are coercively giving power to one group. I disagree with that approach.

People favor one group over another.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Nice non-response to the horrors that governments have committed throughout history.

That response detailed the irrelevance of that statement. People commit atrocities, does that mean we should give up on people? Just like not all people are evil, not all governments are evil.

(15-07-2013 07:46 AM)mdak06 Wrote:  Please explain to me why coercion is the best way for humans to interact.

Because it is the only way social animals interact. Whether or not it is a limited or unrestrained form is entirely dependent on the situation. Seriously, take a goddamn sociology course.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2013, 11:20 AM (This post was last modified: 16-07-2013 01:16 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
(15-07-2013 03:04 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Anarchism and Libertarianism are both completely and utterly ridiculous. They are just as equally delusional as Marxism and Communism and rely on the notion of Darwinian Economics as a means to run a nation.
I believe that Darwinian Economics is ultimately unavoidable, and that devising a system to deploy it justly is the task that is at hand in our post-modern society. It is silly to believe that the continued re-population of inadequate people is not a drag on society. They contribute to global warming without any regard for the future - they do not care about anyone but themselves.

The people who voice sympathy for stupid people are not sincerely compassionate, but rather, they are exploiting the plight in an effort to extort (coercion) funding for their employment in the welfare industry.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2013, 12:27 PM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
How's that dewey decimal system Trainwreck?

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2013, 12:38 PM
RE: Political Insight: Set Me Straight
http://www.secularlibrary.com/

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: