A Peaceful non-violent society is inevitable

Yet you never put any blame on Conservatives/GOP/Right wing... It's all the fault of "liberals". You don't see any flaw in your thinking? Are you fucking blind?

 

Yeah I had a problem with how STP seemed to blame liberals more than conservatives, I almost hear no criticism behind his posts aimed at conservative views.

He knows this, and responded to me with the catch all phrase, that he just honestly disagrees with government entirely, and that by saying that it implies he hates conservatives too, because he doesn't believe they are real conservatives.


But I back what Melai said to STP, Communism was basically the same platform of argumentation STP is pushing here it sounds like...and I'm saying a society on Earth tried that already and it didn't work and made corruption worse because power struggles and thus violence and force are inherent into the human species.

 

25

I read through your posts carefully to find out if you answer or address any of the outstanding criticisms I and others have levelled at your ideas and so far you haven’t.

I mean look at your post #99

We have been through taxation and shown how your ideas would only increase the power and influence of wealth to dominate society

You have never addressed those criticisms

On charity it’s been shown that private giving has never been enough to relieve hardship and suffering that is why people fought for better public cover, infrastructure and regulation.

And we have shown many times that your ideas wouldn’t result in some no government utopia but a state dominated by a wealthy elite very similar to some medieval model of lords and surfs.

Again criticisms you seem unable to address - but instead just accuse us of being liberal/communist brainwashed ignoramuses, and frankly such name calling seems to be all you are capable of.

 

Monkjr

I disagree they are completely different – the left wing Anarchy was the withering away of the state and with it money and property, 25 (or STP) is promoting the right wing libertarian anarcho-capitalist route which most Anarchist don’t accept as Anarchy.

A good general book on the subject is

‘Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism by Peter Marshall
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0006862454/qid=1141817809/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/026-7013781-2335648"]Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism: Amazon.co.uk: Peter Marshall: Books


Chapter 36 covers anarcho-capitalism

Anarcho-capitalists are against the State simply because they are capitalists first and foremost. Their critique of the State ultimately rests on a liberal interpretation of liberty as the inviolable rights to and of private property. They are not concerned with the social consequences of capitalism for the weak, powerless and ignorant. Their claim that all would benefit from a free exchange in the market is by no means certain; any unfettered market system would most likely sponsor a reversion to an unequal society with defence associations perpetuating exploitation and privilege. If anything, anarcho-capitalism is merely a free-for-all in which only the rich and cunning would benefit. It is tailor-made for 'rugged individualists' who do not care about the damage to others or to the environment which they leave in their wake. The forces of the market cannot provide genuine conditions for freedom any more than the powers of the State. The victims of both are equally enslaved, alienated and oppressed.

read full chapter here
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/s...5&postcount=10

 

The problem with any move toward a ‘no government’ society is that during the steps from government to no government – imbalances in power and influence arise and become strong enough to hijack governance in their favour effectively derailing the move toward ‘non governance’.

In communism the state was hijacked by the leaders of the communist party (which stop being communist at that point) and with the anarcho-capitalist route it would be wealth that given so much power would hijack the state.

Which it has done to some extend through neo-liberal policies that have lowered taxes etc.

 

Acknowledged Balbus, I'll check that read out when I have some time.


---


Also I'd like to add a historical reference in history to where government federal agencies were NECESSARY because PRIVATE sector cut corners on safety and DID NOT use common sense.


Look at the legal fight it took to get seat belts mandatory in all cars.
There was a big legal battle over it, despite that the lack of seat belts were killing the auto manufactures customers.

The argument was installing seatbelt a was too costly a burden and would hamper competitiveness and infringe on stockholder's profits.

The federal government advocating for the public good has that liberal reputation for multiple reasons where they functioned in a very positive way for society.

1. OSHA

2. The 5 day workweek

3. NTSB


STP's claims, sound like they'd do away with all government agencies like that, and seems to suggest that individuals are responsible enough to not cut corners because they'll use common sense, and that they can hold enough sway to sue the company.

With the wealth distribution always favoring and funding a bigger lawyer team, the little individual is at a disadvantage in court and possibly in legal representation.

There's a reason private legal arbitration exists, corporations tend to settle and have a budget set aside to quell legal upsets in "settlements".

 

Monkjr


All these types of criticisms of 25’s ideas have been raised before often in length and in detail – the problem is that he just refuses to address them instead preferring abuse and lying.

 

True conservatism is about shrinking Government and lowering taxes. I hated Bush, I hate Romney, and, I hate the "GOP."

There is no reason to talk about their hypocrisy, because they openly admit they want Government to police the world.


Liberals pretend they believe in Human Rights, then, defend a system that fights tooth and nail for the contrary. So don't call me fucking retarded, because I'm the only one with an attention span big enough, to look into both political parties for what they are.

 

I addressed your criticisms in multiple different instances. I answered your biased criticisms multiple times.

Pages and pages, I've wrote, trying to explain the concepts to you. You don't understand, because you don't want to understand..
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=487026&f=36

 

It's hysterical how you Liberals use the word "capitalism" as if it is tyranny itself.

Capitalism is actually the fairest system in Human Society. Before Capitalism- there was no middle class. People were either VERY Rich Government (or their family,) or, they were VERY poor, unable to afford even basic essentials. You claim you want to help people, but, Communism, is Government controlling every aspect of the free market, and, setting their own price.

So, think about what that would result in. Everyone will be forced to give a majority of their paychecks, for basic essentials, Government blankets over us. Sure, everyone will be fed, and, taken care of; But, the consequence is higher prices,lower quality of service and, the same power-grab we already have, with even more power.


You Liberals always criticize, but, you fail to question or criticize your own views. I've asked you many questions about your Liberal views, but, you don't even attempt to defend yourselves, you merely attack my views and character, based on rash and knee-jerk misconceptions.

This should show anyone that I'm not the one rolling in ignorance. Balbus, you refuse to think anyone but Government can take care of Human Services, when the individuals and corporations are not only capable of maintaining society, we would have a better and fairer society, than a system created to give power to an elite few.

 

Btw, the Government failed to finance the building of the Statue of Liberty. That's why, it never got built, and, it's sitting in pieces on Liberty Island

 

I would watch myself if I were you to not get caught up in the old divide and conquer game. Yeah, it's a cliché tactic and statement but really, if we want to discuss the possibility of a peaceful nonviolent society it IS possible to not resort to the old blame game and even to wholely leave the terms liberal and conservative out of it. What do you think?

 

25

LIAR – but please prove me wrong and show where you have address the criticisms in anything like a rational and reasonable way.

I ask again although all the other times I’ve asked you to prove that you are not a liar you’ve not been able to.

 

I'm not the one caught up in that paradox; I think both major political parties, work in the best interest of the Elite. That means I think they're all guilty of treason and inhumanities that would be inexcusable for anyone BUT Government to do.

I'm not caught up in anything. I just want people to understand, that Liberalism is not Humanitarian. Maybe it's fine for people who have accepted a system of violence for hundreds of years. But, america is supposed to be based on freedom and Human Rights.

Most Liberals believe in disarmament, more taxes and, more Government Programs.

Btw, america is not bad; Our Government is horrific. Me, as a white male, have been stopped by police, searched and, harassed many times. Police in america will threaten arrest, if they don't like what you're saying.

a man was arrested for "Terroristic threats" For saying "don't worry I'm not a school shooter." jokingly.

a Kid was arrested for the same thing, for rap lyrics that Mentioned the Boston Marathon.

Cops in Washington DC were caught running Prostitution Rings

The US Government has killed citizens, including protesters. They have brutalized protestors through the police force.

and, they've given themselves the authority to detain any citizen without trial.

It's worse than I say it is...

 

How does it matter that you are a white male? Would you be searched and harrassed less if you were something else perhaps? Why did you specificly mentioned that? Just wondering!

 

25


To repeat it not about the supposed problems it’s about your solutions, we think what you have suggested would make a bad situation far worse criticism you refuse to address.

 

Much better :2thumbsup: bobby: )

To call him a liar seems not a very succesful way to get answers out of him (same counts for STP of course, if he really wants a fun and constructive convo or really teach us as he said himself)

 

The thing is, that balbus doesn't pay any attention anyway.

Corrupt corporations, can easily go out of business for anything from pollution, to, underpaying employees. The answer is disassociation; Don't work for people who are underpaying you, and, don't buy products from people, if you don't like their business practices. This is one major form of punishment, that can lead to companies going bankrupt. The thing is, there are nonviolent ways to take care of these problems, but, when people come at it, from a perspective that nothing except Government will work, they're not going to listen.

 

Well, we (including Balbus) are trying to get the answers out of you. And not because of our lack of interest or attention me thinks So why not give them (again if you have to) if your thread would only benefit of it?

 

stp people are forced to work for businesses that treat them poorly all the time, out of necessity. You act as if work is plentiful and easy to come by.

In capitalism, the most humane corporations don't necessarily thrive, or even the ones offering the best product. It's the most profitable corporations that succeed, and profitability sometimes runs right over the more important things such a providing quality service an paying and treating workers right.