Page 39 of 67 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 668

Thread: It sucks being healthy!!! page 39

  1. #381
    wiltondeportes's Avatar
    wiltondeportes Guest
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    A common defense of the State holds that man is a “social animal,” that he must live in society, and that individualists and libertarians believe in the existence of “atomistic individuals” uninfluenced by and unrelated to their fellow men. But no libertarians have ever held individuals to be isolated atoms; on the contrary, all libertarians have recognized the necessity and the enormous advantages of living in society, and of participating in the social division of labor. The great non sequitur committed by defenders of the State, including classical Aristotelian and Thomist philosophers, is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the State.[29]

    On the contrary, as we have indicated, the State is an antisocial instrument, crippling voluntary interchange, individual creativity, and the division of labor. “Society” is a convenient label for the voluntary interrelations of individuals, in peaceful exchange and on the market. Here we may point to Albert Jay Nock’s penetrating distinction between “social power” – the fruits of voluntary interchange in the economy and in civilization – and “State power,” the coercive interference and exploitation of those fruits. In that light, Nock showed that human history is basically a race between State power and social power, between the beneficent fruits of peaceful and voluntary production and creativity on the one hand, and the crippling and parasitic blight of State power upon the voluntary and productive social process.[30]

    All of the services commonly thought to require the State – from the coining of money to police protection to the development of law in defense of the rights of person and property – can be and have been supplied far more efficiently and certainly more morally by private persons. The State is in no sense required by the nature of man; quite the contrary.
    My defense never was that man is a social animal, so this counter-argument is speaking to thin air.

    The state cripples the division of labor? Like I said, without state, we revert to tribal living. There's no comparison between a tribal division of labor and a civilized division of labor. A tribe never has and never will accomplish anything great; therefore only civilized divisions of labor have.

    Why were those services (coining, police, etc) provided outside of the state? Because the state held together civilization. Take away the state, then you take away civilization, then you take away the profit for such services, then you take away the services.

  2. #382
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltondeportes View Post
    My defense never was that man is a social animal, so this counter-argument is speaking to thin air.

    The state cripples the division of labor? Like I said, without state, we revert to tribal living. There's no comparison between a tribal division of labor and a civilized division of labor. A tribe never has and never will accomplish anything great; therefore only civilized divisions of labor have.

    Why were those services (coining, police, etc) provided outside of the state? Because the state held together civilization. Take away the state, then you take away civilization, then you take away the profit for such services, then you take away the services.
    Another slippery slope fallacy? Keep it coming.
    nihil

  3. #383
    wiltondeportes's Avatar
    wiltondeportes Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Government empowers the 1%, are you fucking kidding me? What fairytale land do you live in?
    Citizens elect people, citizens vote on issues, elected people elect other people. It's not perfect, but it is public, and there are as many checks and balances to power as have ever been created. There is currently no better option.

    Without government, people live in tribes because no high amount of organization could exist without publicly agreed upon rules. But to continue *your* fairytale, there would be even less checks on the power of the 1%, and they would reign with even more power. The government restricts this, centralizes power, and ideally distributes it to its citizens. It doesn't do it perfectly, but anarchism doesn't do it at all.

  4. #384
    wiltondeportes's Avatar
    wiltondeportes Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Another slippery slope fallacy? Keep it coming.
    It's not a fallacy if there really is a slippery slope. Large groups of humans and increasing levels of technology require increasing complexity of rules and organization. So taking away rules and formal organization means splitting up large groups of humans into small groups.

    The "slippery slope" that I can agree upon is the continuum between anarchy and authoritarianism. That is certainly a continuum, and there is a proper middle ground for it with answers high and low on the scale for specific questions. Of course, this is apparently not a slippery slope you're seeing because you advocate pure anarchy. Thus, I return the fallacious accusation back to you.
    Last edited by wiltondeportes; 09-11-2013 at 06:46 PM.

  5. #385
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltondeportes View Post
    [I]
    Citizens elect people, citizens vote on issues, elected people elect other people. It's not perfect, but it is public, and there are as many checks and balances to power as have ever been created. There is currently no better option.

    Without government, people live in tribes because no high amount of organization could exist without publicly agreed upon rules. But to continue *your* fairytale, there would be even less checks on the power of the 1%, and they would reign with even more power. The government restricts this, centralizes power, and ideally distributes it to its citizens. It doesn't do it perfectly, but anarchism doesn't do it at all.
    Democracy is a farce. Do you really think citizens elect people? Both parties are the exact same thing, and they're all backed by the same Jewish banker gold promoting the same war mongering agenda. Democracy is not freedom or choice, it's a tool of the state. "Consensus" has clear winners and losers. The rest have to suffer with the consequences. Again, this is assuming that both parties weren't exactly the same.

    You don't know anything about this subject, clearly. I think you must have been living under a rock for the last century or so, and you're so brainwashed you have no idea what the fuck is going on in your own country.

    There is no coercion. This is the difference. We have different ways of dealing with things.
    nihil

  6. #386
    LauraSB's Avatar
    LauraSB is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Delaware Valley
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltondeportes View Post
    And libertarianism is fantastical nonsense. Civilization (officially organized as government) comes together not only to prevent a return to Grok life (Hobbes' social contract), but it also comes together for greatness and achievement (Aristotle and Nietzsche echo this). If you really prefer a return to primitive life, then you throw out all greatness ever found in human civilization and anything to come in the future. Yours is an antisocietal/antisocial philosophy that gets parroted by simple-minded twats that just want to be angry at someone and the uneducated who rightfully are disappointed with an apparent loss of certain liberties; they don't realize that libertarianism means more than just "liberty", a vague concept anyways (read 2 Concepts of Liberty by Isaiah Berlin).
    Of course, this has devolved into a very tedious political discussion, but I just wanted to say that this is the sexiest thing you have ever posted WD and even if you are an annoying egoist at your tender age, there may be hope for you before you reach 30.

    Also, I understand the appeal of southern women. I did my undergrad at UGA after growing up in the Midwest. Traditionally, they have a softness and congeniality that can be extraordinarily refreshing if you are from elsewhere. My son has recently moved from the Northeast to the South and I suspect he will find a woman that suits him better there. But don't confuse what they offer for malleability. They will surely grab you by the shorthairs and put your balls in a vice as effectively as any West Coast harpy, but by the time you realize what has happened, you will be as helpless as a bug on a pin. I should have such talents!
    50yo, 5'3"
    SW-195
    CW-125, part calorie counting, part transition to primal
    GW- Goals are no longer weight-related

  7. #387
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltondeportes View Post
    It's not a fallacy if there really is a slippery slope. Large groups of humans and increasing levels of technology require increasing complexity of rules and organization. So taking away rules and formal organization means splitting up large groups of humans into small groups.

    The "slippery slope" that I can agree upon is the continuum between anarchy and authoritarianism. That is certainly a continuum, and there is a proper middle ground for it with answers high and low on the scale for specific questions. Of course, this is apparently not a slippery slope you're seeing because you advocate pure anarchy. Thus, I return the fallacious accusation back to you.
    You draw a conclusion saying we revert back to tribe mentality. This is a common argument of a statist, and has been refuted a million times over. In the video I linked is one example.

    Mythological conclusions based on mythological assumptions are "proven" by means of the statistics and the charts; much of “applied social science” consists of teaching young people what kind of “data” to gather in order to make the conclusions come out, and much of “theory” consists of fitting this data to the pre-established formulas. By means of numerous techniques, for example, it can be “ proved” that workers would rather have high paying jobs than enjoyable or meaningful jobs, that people “like” what they hear on the radio or see on television, that almost anyone votes either for democrats or for republicans. Students are taught one set of methods for gathering the data, a second set for arranging them, a third set for presenting them, and “theories” for interpreting them. The apologetic content of the “data” is covered up by its statistical sophistication. In a society where eating depends on getting paid, and thus where doing “meaningful work” may mean one doesn’t get paid, a worker’s preference for high paying over meaningful jobs merely means he’d rather eat than not eat. In a society where people do not create and control what they hear on the radio or see on television, they have no choice but to “like” what they hear and see, or else to turn the damn thing off.

    All of these things can simply be explained away by the fact they have no choice.

    Freedom. I'm waiting for an explanation from you how a voluntary society fails, is uncivilized, or resorts to tribe mentality simply because there is no state to govern them. Do you have that little faith in mankind? Your other paragraph previously seems like a contradiction then.
    nihil

  8. #388
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by LauraSB View Post
    Of course, this has devolved into a very tedious political discussion, but I just wanted to say that this is the sexiest thing you have ever posted WD and even if you are an annoying egoist at your tender age, there may be hope for you before you reach 30.

    Also, I understand the appeal of southern women. I did my undergrad at UGA after growing up in the Midwest. Traditionally, they have a softness and congeniality that can be extraordinarily refreshing if you are from elsewhere. My son has recently moved from the Northeast to the South and I suspect he will find a woman that suits him better there. But don't confuse what they offer for malleability. They will surely grab you by the shorthairs and put your balls in a vice as effectively as any West Coast harpy, but by the time you realize what has happened, you will be as helpless as a bug on a pin. I should have such talents!
    You have low standards then. He claims men aren't social creatures, yet says this ideology is antisocial, and cannot even refute this:

    "A common defense of the State holds that man is a “social animal,” that he must live in society, and that individualists and libertarians believe in the existence of “atomistic individuals” uninfluenced by and unrelated to their fellow men. But no libertarians have ever held individuals to be isolated atoms; on the contrary, all libertarians have recognized the necessity and the enormous advantages of living in society, and of participating in the social division of labor. The great non sequitur committed by defenders of the State, including classical Aristotelian and Thomist philosophers, is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the State.[29]

    On the contrary, as we have indicated, the State is an antisocial instrument, crippling voluntary interchange, individual creativity, and the division of labor. “Society” is a convenient label for the voluntary interrelations of individuals, in peaceful exchange and on the market. Here we may point to Albert Jay Nock’s penetrating distinction between “social power” – the fruits of voluntary interchange in the economy and in civilization – and “State power,” the coercive interference and exploitation of those fruits. In that light, Nock showed that human history is basically a race between State power and social power, between the beneficent fruits of peaceful and voluntary production and creativity on the one hand, and the crippling and parasitic blight of State power upon the voluntary and productive social process.[30]

    All of the services commonly thought to require the State – from the coining of money to police protection to the development of law in defense of the rights of person and property – can be and have been supplied far more efficiently and certainly more morally by private persons. The State is in no sense required by the nature of man; quite the contrary."

    In fact, he repeatedly commits the same fallacies Rothbard describes in this as well.

    And wilton, pls respond:

    You just destroyed your own argument. You have no facts, or evidence. The rest is redundant, and you're droning on about a whole of nothing, particularly your contradictory final paragraph.

    A state utopia will never exist either, and it has been, and currently in practice everywhere. You blame human beings on the downfall of society, but place necessity on the state to control these people. Does that not mean that your state is failing? The failure of people is done by the state enabling policies that repeatedly fail these people.

    You are now King of the world, free to do whatever you want with the Earth's society. What laws, policies, et al. do you create to "fix" everything? How do you fix the economy that the state has ruined through deceitful "borrowing" and printing useless paper currencies that have no real meaning. The history of money is that at every turn it has been created by states. Virtually every naturally emerging market in history has been a credit-based one, and the state has later commodified this credit for the purpose of paying soliders who do not have the necessary social ties to maintain the network of trust necessary to function within a credit economy.

    Do you expand government even more? Do you decrease government? You have all the answers apparently, enough to discredit widescale anarchy based on the fact it has never existed(it hasn't), so surely you can enlighten me.
    Last edited by Derpamix; 09-11-2013 at 07:05 PM.
    nihil

  9. #389
    j3nn's Avatar
    j3nn is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Manhattan, NY
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Do you ever wonder why the state slanders and yet fears anarchy and freedom so much? Hint: it's not because people are inherently violent savage creatures. They're the only violent savages around.
    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

    “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

  10. #390
    wiltondeportes's Avatar
    wiltondeportes Guest
    Learn More
    Quote Originally Posted by LauraSB View Post
    Of course, this has devolved into a very tedious political discussion, but I just wanted to say that this is the sexiest thing you have ever posted WD and even if you are an annoying egoist at your tender age, there may be hope for you before you reach 30.

    Also, I understand the appeal of southern women. I did my undergrad at UGA after growing up in the Midwest. Traditionally, they have a softness and congeniality that can be extraordinarily refreshing if you are from elsewhere. My son has recently moved from the Northeast to the South and I suspect he will find a woman that suits him better there. But don't confuse what they offer for malleability. They will surely grab you by the shorthairs and put your balls in a vice as effectively as any West Coast harpy, but by the time you realize what has happened, you will be as helpless as a bug on a pin. I should have such talents!
    Anybody with an ego is an egoist. Anybody without an ego is either lying to others or themselves.

    And come get 'em.

Page 39 of 67 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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