Reddit Declares Itself A ‘Government’

CreepyUncleGoogle said:
In the short term, they might. Eventually, they'll end up organizing into a social strata with leadership and followership, ultimately ending the disorganized state or they'll cease to exist which makes the entire matter moot. However, they'll never perpetually remain unorganized.
Click to expand...

They will as necessary. With disorganization comes disruption of resources. Some will need them more than others, and some will choose to do without or go on their own. Whatever organization is eventually created may elect to leave those people to their own devices. Independent local governments acting for local interest, with no room for excess because of the situation. It's how much of Frontier America in the 1800s operated.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
I should continue to pay taxes to the mafia because the mafia has a monopoly and it would be immoral to not support the monopoly.
Click to expand...

This is all well and good but meaningless until you can tell people how the roads they drive on are supposed to funded. We have plenty of meaningless platitudes in politics today but very little detailed discussion of how we even pay for the basics like roads.
 
Stiletto said:
You cannot treat cultures as equal. They are not. Each will react differently when faced with disorganization.
Click to expand...

Human nature is human nature. Rip away the facades that cultures, governments, and religions dictate and get right down to survivalist instincts and the vast majority of humanity will act the same way. Very few people are altruistic by nature and will seek to serve themselves and their appetites.
 
heatlesssun said:
This is all well and good but meaningless until you can tell people how the roads they drive on are supposed to funded. We have plenty of meaningless platitudes in politics today but very little detailed discussion of how we even pay for the basics like roads.
Click to expand...

Like this.

Polihale State Park has been closed since severe flooding destroyed an access road to the park and damaged facilities in December.

The state Department of Land and Natural Resources had estimated that the damage would cost $4 million to fix, money the agency doesn't have, according to a news release from department Chairwoman Laura Thielen.
[...]
So Slack, other business owners and residents made the decision not to sit on their hands and wait for state money that many expected would never come. Instead, they pulled together machinery and manpower and hit the ground running March 23.

And after only eight days, all of the repairs were done, Pleas said. It was a shockingly quick fix to a problem that may have taken much longer if they waited for state money to funnel in.

"We can wait around for the state or federal government to make this move, or we can go out and do our part," Slack said. "Just like everyone's sitting around waiting for a stimulus check, we were waiting for this but decided we couldn't wait anymore."
Click to expand...
 
DeathFromBelow said:
Saying that 'war requires government' is a blatantly false claim.....


.....
Click to expand...

Saying that cave dwellers killed each other doesn't invalidate my claim. I'm not arguing against government as we knew it a million years ago, I'm arguing against government as we know it now.

War is an organized effort by groups of people to kill each other. It is an immensely expensive undertaking, and IN MODERN TIMES, only governments have the capability to cough up that kind of resources - because they have the power of taxation and money printing.
 
Stiletto said:
They will as necessary. With disorganization comes disruption of resources. Some will need them more than others, and some will choose to do without or go on their own. Whatever organization is eventually created may elect to leave those people to their own devices. Independent local governments acting for local interest, with no room for excess because of the situation. It's how much of Frontier America in the 1800s operated.
Click to expand...

Yup, there'll always be a few outliers that really genuinely do better on their own, alone without any other people. What I'm getting at is that, even small towns or little clusters of a few people make some kind of societal structure. Yes, those structures get larger as smaller groups merge for whatever mutual needs must be met. It's just something that's unavoidably part of being a human and having to live around other people. That basic premise spans all sizes of groups. If there are two people in the same place, one of them will lead or the two person society will cease to exist.
 
heatlesssun said:
This is all well and good but meaningless until you can tell people how the roads they drive on are supposed to funded. We have plenty of meaningless platitudes in politics today but very little detailed discussion of how we even pay for the basics like roads.
Click to expand...

Private dudes own some shit > Build a road > let others use it for free so they have patrons / advertising / etc.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
Private dudes own some shit > Build a road > let others use it for free so they have patrons / advertising / etc.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, private businesses are a form of human organization. Whey businesses take over the role of government in its absence, they become government. Thus, anarchy doesn't to exist when businesses exist.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
It depends on people organizing collectively to accept it as having value which isn't anarchy. Try again.
Click to expand...

When I say anarchy, I mean a lack of archons, not the existence of chaos.

You can have a voluntary community of anarchists.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, private businesses are a form of human organization. Whey businesses take over the role of government in its absence, they become government. Thus, anarchy doesn't to exist when businesses exist.
Click to expand...

You clearly do not understand what differentiates government from all other forms of organization. It is coercive, at least in the very sense that I am unable to opt out.

Business, except where it exploits the coercive nature of government, is voluntary. For instance, most people didn't want to buy GMs cars, because they're shit. GM had to go to the government to get people to buy their cars (except without actually transferring physical goods to the consumers), by force.

If I didn't support the GM bailout, I couldn't withhold some portion of my taxes.
 
I've read a lot more about anarchy than a single page entry in an online glossary.

You clearly haven't. You know less about anarchy than you do about bitcoin, which is quite an achievement.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
When I say anarchy, I mean a lack of archons, not the existence of chaos.

You can have a voluntary community of anarchists.
Click to expand...

No you can't. When you have one of those, you have an organized society with leaders and governance (along with some random person who complains about their leaders off in the corner mumbling to himself).

spintroniX said:
You clearly do not understand what differentiates government from all other forms of organization. It is coercive, at least in the very sense that I am unable to opt out.

Business, except where it exploits the coercive nature of government, is voluntary. For instance, most people didn't want to buy GMs cars, because they're shit. GM had to go to the government to get people to buy their cars (except without actually transferring physical goods to the consumers), by force.

If I didn't support the GM bailout, I couldn't withhold some portion of my taxes.
Click to expand...

You can move somewhere else. No one is forcing you to stay so the US government is not coercive in any sense as you can indeed opt out.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Yup, there'll always be a few outliers that really genuinely do better on their own, alone without any other people. What I'm getting at is that, even small towns or little clusters of a few people make some kind of societal structure. Yes, those structures get larger as smaller groups merge for whatever mutual needs must be met. It's just something that's unavoidably part of being a human and having to live around other people. That basic premise spans all sizes of groups. If there are two people in the same place, one of them will lead or the two person society will cease to exist.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, but in recognizing that tendency, isn't it evident that those structures eventually grow to a point where they are a danger to the majority? If history has taught us anything, it's that empires eventually grow corrupt and die. We're taught this in school. Why, then, is it so unfathomable to some that either the United States is approaching this point, or that we could survive with less? Personally, I consider it a form of Stockholm Syndrome. We continually reassure each other in society that change is hard, but that we should try it anyway...but then we don't put that philosophy into practice in scaling back government. Although, I will admit, I think the recent backlash against the militarization of police is a damned good first step.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
It depends on people organizing collectively to accept it as having value which isn't anarchy. Try again.
Click to expand...

again, you don't understand what you're arguing against.

Anarchy doesn't mean chaos, it doesn't mean disorder. It just means that nobody gets to rule over other people.

People WANT order, absolutely. They will therefore form organizations and hierarchies. But these are not governments, as they are free and voluntary associations. If people don't like a particular association (for instance, they decide they don't like their pastor at their church) they are free to change that association.

A government is a non voluntary monopoly on coercion, within a given geographical region. This is distinctly different.
 
heatlesssun said:
This is all well and good but meaningless until you can tell people how the roads they drive on are supposed to funded. We have plenty of meaningless platitudes in politics today but very little detailed discussion of how we even pay for the basics like roads.
Click to expand...

How do you fund the roads, for fucks sake that is all anyone seems to comprehend from this discussion. The answer is who the fuck cares how you pay for them. The point people who are against taxation are making is not that tax dollars in of themselves are not useful but rather the method in which they are collected. For the system to be truly just and equal the infrastructure system needs to be taxed on a use basis. For example if you use the internet today you must pay a tax to build and maintain the network. If you drive your car today you must pay a tax for road construction and repairs and so on. This will ensure that those who pay for what ever it happens to be are the ones using it. Does this cause some social inequalities, I don't profess to know. But it is likely that those inequalities will arise. However, it is far more just than saying "we are going to take X percentage of your income to fund the "government"" while providing little to no accountability insofar as the return on taxation that each citizen receives. This also makes the system voluntary. There are no more pet projects for politicians to promise their citizens. You want a park? Run a cost/usage analysis on it. Will enough people use it and pay the tax on the park to justify the creation? No, well then it doesn't get built. Harsh? Maybe, but far more useful than the current pandering system of politics we have now. This also will create a system of governmental competition. city A has a park and City B has a park. If the park in city A is such a level that the people of City B feel they are receiving a better value for their money by paying the road tax and the park tax to go to city A and use their park well then the park in city B either has to up its game of redevelop into something that will better suit the needs of the community. While general taxes will still be needed for things such as defense and international needs these will be highly streamlined due to the fact that every citizen will be able to see how much they are paying for each of these services.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
I've read a lot more about anarchy than a single page entry in an online glossary.

You clearly haven't. You know less about anarchy than you do about bitcoin, which is quite an achievement.
Click to expand...

Yup, all of that is just organization under a different guise. So ultimately, you're a statist who supports a different state than is currently in place and not an anarchist of any sort.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
No you can't. When you have one of those, you have an organized society with leaders and governance (along with some random person who complains about their leaders off in the corner mumbling to himself).
Click to expand...

We're starting to pinpoint the source of your problem. In addition to knowing fuck-all about anarchy or bitcoin, you evidently don't know the difference between governance and government.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
....

You can move somewhere else. No one is forcing you to stay so the US government is not coercive in any sense as you can indeed opt out.
Click to expand...

AGAIN, the opposite of being ruled over isn't being ruled by someone else - it is being free from rulers.

Simply because I have NO choice in the matter, doesn't mean that I choose the status quo.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
We're starting to pinpoint the source of your problem. In addition to knowing fuck-all about anarchy or bitcoin, you evidently don't know the difference between governance and government.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes...let's turn to insults when we find out we're just the same as everyone else and not uniquely individual. I know being human like everyone else sometimes sucks, but it's sad to watch people who are obviously older than me grapple with the difficulties of coming to terms with being part of society and rebelling against it after the usual teenage phase is over. You can lash out all you want, but eventually life experiences will help you find your way.
 
spintroniX said:
AGAIN, the opposite of being ruled over isn't being ruled by someone else - it is being free from rulers.

Simply because I have NO choice in the matter, doesn't mean that I choose the status quo.
Click to expand...

No one's forcing you to move to a place ruled by someone else either. I didn't suggest that.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Yes, yes...let's turn to insults when we find out we're just the same as everyone else and not uniquely individual. I know being human like everyone else sometimes sucks, but it's sad to watch people who are obviously older than me grapple with the difficulties of coming to terms with being part of society and rebelling against it after the usual teenage phase is over. You can lash out all you want, but eventually life experiences will help you find your way.
Click to expand...

I'm a 31 year old who makes six figures.
 
spintroniX said:
Saying that cave dwellers killed each other doesn't invalidate my claim. I'm not arguing against government as we knew it a million years ago, I'm arguing against government as we know it now.

War is an organized effort by groups of people to kill each other. It is an immensely expensive undertaking, and IN MODERN TIMES, only governments have the capability to cough up that kind of resources - because they have the power of taxation and money printing.
Click to expand...

War doesn't need to include guns, killing, or violence. War doesn't need to be large scale nor does it need to be expensive. War can be waged against 2 people if they so choose. You are arguing based on your definition of war which happens to be incorrect.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, private businesses are a form of human organization. Whey businesses take over the role of government in its absence, they become government. Thus, anarchy doesn't to exist when businesses exist.
Click to expand...

Exactly, apparently no one here has watched Robocop, and has seen what happens when OCP takes over. :p
 
aardvark sandwich said:
I'm a 31 year old who makes six figures.
Click to expand...

Good! That's pretty much supportive of what you quoted.

Red Falcon said:
Exactly, apparently no one here has watched Robocop, and has seen what happens when OCP takes over. :p
Click to expand...

Eep...I'm really, really sorry *hangs head in shame* but I haven't watched Robocop either. But it's on Amazon Instant Video and I'm putting in on my weekend to watch list. :D
 
aardvark sandwich said:
I'm a 31 year old who makes six figures.
Click to expand...

What does your paycheck have to do with anything?
I've seen CEOs make 100x that who are absolute lunatics and make terrible choices which ultimately ruin many peoples lives, including their own.

There are more important factors in life than how much money one makes, such as character, honor, experience, etc.
Those few things are worth more than all of the money in the world.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Eep...I'm really, really sorry *hangs head in shame* but I haven't watched Robocop either. But it's on Amazon Instant Video and I'm putting in on my weekend to watch list. :D
Click to expand...

haha, yet, even though you haven't watched it, you appear to know more than most in this thread! ;)
 
Red Falcon said:
What does your paycheck have to do with anything?
I've seen CEOs make 100x that who are absolute lunatics and make terrible choices which ultimately ruin many peoples lives, including their own.

There are more important factors in life than how much money one makes, such as character, honor, experience, etc.
Those few things are worth more than all of the money in the world.
Click to expand...

He thinks I'm 19 or 20 and am frustrated that things aren't working out for me.

He's off a bit, is all.
 
Red Falcon said:
haha, yet, even though you haven't watched it, you appear to know more than most in this thread! ;)
Click to expand...

Aw gee!

Oooh, there's like a ton of Robocop movies on Amazon. Is it the 1987 one that I'm supposed to watch or the 2003, 2007, 2014 version? So many choices...
 
aardvark sandwich said:
I'm a 31 year old who makes six figures.
Click to expand...

The quote from your sig:
You are not Christians, you are not Jews, you are not Muslims and you certainly aren’t atheists. You all have the same god, and it’s name is Government. You are all members of the most evil, insane, destructive cult in history. If there ever was a devil, the State is it. And you worship it with all your heart and soul.
Click to expand...

No, your god is not the State/Government, your god is money.

A government entity is not intrinsically evil.
The corruption and greed of men and women, is what makes it so.

Kettle meet pot?
 
aardvark sandwich said:
Private dudes own some shit > Build a road > let others use it for free so they have patrons / advertising / etc.
Click to expand...

A private toll road is being considered where I live. As the plan looks now, no one is going to be driving on it for free. Indeed the rumored price of the toll has a LOT of people going ape over the project. At any rate, as public money runs dry and with the need for more roads and maintenance increasing, I expect that there will be a lot more for-profit private companies in the roads business. But as private ownership and serving of roads continues to grow, I wouldn't think those strong arm tactics and mafia influence wouldn't find any less of a home than in the public sector. It's not like people would have a lot of choice in paying whatever the price or not getting to work. And if it's a bitch to find competition in the cable business, try finding another road or bridge provider.
 
Red Falcon said:
The quote from your sig:


No, your god is not the State/Government, your god is money.

A government entity is not intrinsically evil.
The corruption and greed of men and women, is what makes it so.

Kettle meet pot?
Click to expand...

lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top