djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 15:00:34 GMT -5
children don't have consent, bro. but they DO get a free education, in many cases. they get the defense of courts and police. they get to ride on the same roads as their parents. that stuff is not free, sir. what you are claiming, here and elsewhere, is that the PRIVILEGE of being a citizen here should be FREE. i completely disagree. it costs money, and it should be paid for by citizens. Did we mention brainwashing as an enslavement technique? it was certainly implied. repeatedly. file under "cultural differences". that would include the US. but don't read too much into what i say, lb. i often exaggerate to make a rhetorical point, and i am even more often sarcastic.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 15:02:34 GMT -5
And that is why it's nonsense to talk of "natural rights" - because the only ones we can practically claim or defend are those constructed for us by our legislative overlords. It's astounding how many people don't "get" this fact. Rights are purchased with authority, and authority is cemented with force. Ideally as little as possible, but genuine, bloody, guns-knives-n-bombs force. Natural rights are about as natural as the stuff they pump out the bottom of distillation columns at oil refineries and market as "Cheez Whiz". i will go further than that. very few rights were "given" to us. most were fought for, and DIED for. rights must be taken, as a general rule. they are almost never given willingly.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 15:05:07 GMT -5
So to bring this full circle to dj's premise that it is possible for other countries not to have a problem with "slavery" due to cultural norms for them, I agree and say that he is suffering from cultural bias not appreciating that many in our culture also do not mind a guilded cage. on the contrary. i think that there are a lot of traps that people fall into here, other than scut work. i think being unquestioning of institutions like government and industry is a trap. i think that expecting people to be unfailingly honest is a trap. i think that automatic deferral to "experts" is a trap. i think that voting in a two party system is a trap in many cases. voting itself can be a trap. trusting elected officials is a trap. expecting the whole truth from the media is a trap. etc, etc, etc. and all of those traps add up to something better than slavery and less than freedom. edit: lb, this is really a fantastic post. it took me half a dozen readings to get it fully. sorry for all the edits.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 18, 2013 15:28:42 GMT -5
As far as I can determine, the only natural, inalienable right I have is the right to drop dead.
And if I can't do that without assistance, I don't really have that right either.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 15:33:06 GMT -5
As far as I can determine, the only natural, inalienable right I have is the right to drop dead. And if I can't do that without assistance, I don't really have that right either. LOL! i can't wait until Paul sees this.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 15:33:13 GMT -5
And that is why it's nonsense to talk of "natural rights" - because the only ones we can practically claim or defend are those constructed for us by our legislative overlords. It's astounding how many people don't "get" this fact. Rights are purchased with authority, and authority is cemented with force. Ideally as little as possible, but genuine, bloody, guns-knives-n-bombs force. Natural rights are about as natural as the stuff they pump out the bottom of distillation columns at oil refineries and market as "Cheez Whiz". Rights are inherent. They are either respected and defended by authority / force; or they are molested, but you have them whether or not they are respected and defended. The United States is the first government in history to attempt to codify into law the rights of the individual, and to attempt to construct a government and a society around the ideal. Human history is 5,000 years, we've been at this for just over two centuries- so it is not surprising that we have slowly snapped back into historical norms- namely that our "legislative overlords" as Mojo puts it- have gradually devolved back into a more typical governmental role. There is currently a MASSIVE groundswell of conservative / libertarian / anarchist movement right now. I'm waiting to see, but I think it is entirely possible that we're going to see conservative Republicans, independents, and big "L" Libertarians at all levels over the next several years. The Liberty Movement is effervescing. We'll see if these next few years produce fruit. My point is that I believe that in the next several decades there will be a rebirth of liberty- because the fact of the matter is that to keep all the balls in the air requires money, and government is going broke.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 15:36:26 GMT -5
children don't have consent, bro. but they DO get a free education, in many cases. they get the defense of courts and police. they get to ride on the same roads as their parents. that stuff is not free, sir. what you are claiming, here and elsewhere, is that the PRIVILEGE of being a citizen here should be FREE. i completely disagree. it costs money, and it should be paid for by citizens. I have yet to be asked whether or not I WANT to be a "citizen". And before you fire back all the benefits- please explain how all the ominous things you're about to say will come upon me without the myriad benefits of "citizenship" differs fundamentally from a mafia protection racket? NOW THAT would be a NOT STUPID thread: Mafia Protection Racket or Government Protection Racket: Which Is Worse?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 15:49:51 GMT -5
Let's take me, for example. I was born- I didn't consent to that. I was raised in a manner I did not consent to. I was educated via compulsory education- I did not consent. At 18 a mystical entity claimed I was legally and adult and bound by a massive network of rules, regulations, and laws- none of which I agreed to; and among these laws are taxes- claim, backed up by threat of force- upon money I have earned, a portion of what I spend, and a percentage of the value of property I own- I do not consent. They claim I had to register for selective service- that I might be drafted into the military and forced to fight- I did not consent. Now THESE are the conditions of slavery. If I attempt to avoid these rules, regulations, laws, etc, I can be tracked down and put into prison- they may take my property. And they set the parameters of when and how they might take these actions- but they don't ask me for my consent. They "bestow upon me" "due process" but f*** due process. I don't consent to any of it. And I really don't care what citizenship allegedly "costs" because I don't consent to it. I never asked for their product, and I don't want to pay the price, and I bear no responsibility if they have allegedly conferred benefits upon me that cost them money because I never asked for any of this. I don't consent. Now, compare that to "scut work" and I guess the answer to the question is still: scut work is better.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 18, 2013 16:28:58 GMT -5
It's astounding how many people don't "get" this fact. Rights are purchased with authority, and authority is cemented with force. Ideally as little as possible, but genuine, bloody, guns-knives-n-bombs force. Natural rights are about as natural as the stuff they pump out the bottom of distillation columns at oil refineries and market as "Cheez Whiz". Rights are inherent. They are either respected and defended by authority / force; or they are molested, but you have them whether or not they are respected and defended. The United States is the first government in history to attempt to codify into law the rights of the individual, and to attempt to construct a government and a society around the ideal. Human history is 5,000 years, we've been at this for just over two centuries- so it is not surprising that we have slowly snapped back into historical norms- namely that our "legislative overlords" as Mojo puts it- have gradually devolved back into a more typical governmental role. There is currently a MASSIVE groundswell of conservative / libertarian / anarchist movement right now. I'm waiting to see, but I think it is entirely possible that we're going to see conservative Republicans, independents, and big "L" Libertarians at all levels over the next several years. The Liberty Movement is effervescing. We'll see if these next few years produce fruit. My point is that I believe that in the next several decades there will be a rebirth of liberty- because the fact of the matter is that to keep all the balls in the air requires money, and government is going broke. Governments may not be instrumental to the application of force (for example, a man with a shotgun in the wild west was capable of defending his rights with little or no government assistance) but do-it-yourself rights enforcement strikes me as a hard sell to Generation Text. As for "the United States is the first government in history to attempt to codify into law the rights of the individual, and to attempt to construct a government and a society around the ideal", you're absolutely right. ...if by "history" you mean "one hour prior to the drafting of the US constitution until present". Loosen that up a bit and there are a few... dozen... thousand... exceptions to contend with.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:37:07 GMT -5
Let's take me, for example. I was born- I didn't consent to that. I was raised in a manner I did not consent to. I was educated via compulsory education- I did not consent. At 18 a mystical entity claimed I was legally and adult and bound by a massive network of rules, regulations, and laws- none of which I agreed to; and among these laws are taxes- claim, backed up by threat of force- upon money I have earned, a portion of what I spend, and a percentage of the value of property I own- I do not consent. They claim I had to register for selective service- that I might be drafted into the military and forced to fight- I did not consent. you are lucky enough to survive childbirth, infancy, and adolescence, and to live in a place where you are not generally at risk and have full recourse to the law, and you think that it should just be given to you, without anything in return. well, give it all back, and we will talk. oh wait- you can't if you are dead.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:39:13 GMT -5
I have yet to be asked whether or not I WANT to be a "citizen". no, that's right. it was generously offered to you. say thank you.And before you fire back all the benefits- please explain how all the ominous things you're about to say will come upon me without the myriad benefits of "citizenship" differs fundamentally from a mafia protection racket? what ominous things? i was going to suggest that you can renounce it, any time. that is your right.NOW THAT would be a NOT STUPID thread: Mafia Protection Racket or Government Protection Racket: Which Is Worse? mafia protection racket, obviously. no social contract there. the fact that you can't recognize that is for you to sort out.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 16:41:56 GMT -5
Let's take me, for example. I was born- I didn't consent to that. I was raised in a manner I did not consent to. I was educated via compulsory education- I did not consent. At 18 a mystical entity claimed I was legally and adult and bound by a massive network of rules, regulations, and laws- none of which I agreed to; and among these laws are taxes- claim, backed up by threat of force- upon money I have earned, a portion of what I spend, and a percentage of the value of property I own- I do not consent. They claim I had to register for selective service- that I might be drafted into the military and forced to fight- I did not consent. you are lucky enough to survive childbirth, infancy, and adolescence, and to live in a place where you are not generally at risk and have full recourse to the law, and you think that it should just be given to you, without anything in return. well, give it all back, and we will talk. oh wait- you can't if you are dead. With respect to the government claim on my property backed up by the threat of force- I would not be the one to give anything back. If anything, I'm due.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:42:54 GMT -5
Rights are inherent. They are either respected and defended by authority / force; or they are molested, but you have them whether or not they are respected and defended. The United States is the first government in history to attempt to codify into law the rights of the individual, and to attempt to construct a government and a society around the ideal. Human history is 5,000 years, we've been at this for just over two centuries- so it is not surprising that we have slowly snapped back into historical norms- namely that our "legislative overlords" as Mojo puts it- have gradually devolved back into a more typical governmental role. There is currently a MASSIVE groundswell of conservative / libertarian / anarchist movement right now. I'm waiting to see, but I think it is entirely possible that we're going to see conservative Republicans, independents, and big "L" Libertarians at all levels over the next several years. The Liberty Movement is effervescing. We'll see if these next few years produce fruit. My point is that I believe that in the next several decades there will be a rebirth of liberty- because the fact of the matter is that to keep all the balls in the air requires money, and government is going broke. Governments may not be instrumental to the application of force (for example, a man with a shotgun in the wild west was capable of defending his rights with little or no government assistance) but do-it-yourself rights enforcement strikes me as a hard sell to Generation Text. hard to sell? impossible. i would rather die than have justice meted out by the likes of Paul.As for "the United States is the first government in history to attempt to codify into law the rights of the individual, and to attempt to construct a government and a society around the ideal", you're absolutely right. ...if by "history" you mean "one hour prior to the drafting of the US constitution until present". Loosen that up a bit and there are a few... dozen... thousand... exceptions to contend with. given that Habeas Corpus has been undermined significantly in the US- and predates the constitution by 570 years, i am thinking that there have been other attempts before ours to codify the rights of men.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 16:43:08 GMT -5
I have yet to be asked whether or not I WANT to be a "citizen". no, that's right. it was generously offered to you. say thank you.And before you fire back all the benefits- please explain how all the ominous things you're about to say will come upon me without the myriad benefits of "citizenship" differs fundamentally from a mafia protection racket? what ominous things? i was going to suggest that you can renounce it, any time. that is your right.NOW THAT would be a NOT STUPID thread: Mafia Protection Racket or Government Protection Racket: Which Is Worse? mafia protection racket, obviously. no social contract there. the fact that you can't recognize that is for you to sort out. There's no such thing as a "social contract". It's a fiction. Like government.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:43:56 GMT -5
you are lucky enough to survive childbirth, infancy, and adolescence, and to live in a place where you are not generally at risk and have full recourse to the law, and you think that it should just be given to you, without anything in return. well, give it all back, and we will talk. oh wait- you can't if you are dead. With respect to the government claim on my property backed up by the threat of force- I would not be the one to give anything back. If anything, I'm due. maybe. but you weren't when you were (18). were you some kind of drone then, or a free thinking individual? edit: Paul, just sell your s(*t and move. you won't have to pay a red cent in taxes anymore. you are absolutely free to go. tell you what, if you want to go in the next year, RENOUNCE YOUR CITIZENSHIP, and i will pay for your one way ticket to CR, just so i don't have to hear about your slavery to our oppressive regime any more. how does that sound? if it does not sound good, then how about you stop pretending that you don't love it here, and work to make it better, like the rest of us?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:46:46 GMT -5
mafia protection racket, obviously. no social contract there. the fact that you can't recognize that is for you to sort out. There's no such thing as a "social contract". It's a fiction. Like government. there is no truth or justice either. but we believe in them, anyway. that is the way life is. you can either accept that this is how we, as a society, choose to do things- or you can choose another option.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 18, 2013 16:52:12 GMT -5
Government, not natural rights, is the imagination. It exists because enough people agree it exists. But when you really start to think about it- it is as absurd a thing as can be. The idea that there exists basically just shy of 600 people who sit in a far distant capitol and pass "laws" that apply to anyone is silly. The idea that 200 years ago, some guys got together and put quill to paper and set in stone the construct by which my whole life is lived is laughable. I asked for nothing, and can give nothing back. I would, however, like what has been taken from me back.
We could talk about money. That's fun because money is also an idea.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 16:57:56 GMT -5
Government, not natural rights, is the imagination. no, government is actually the codification of natural rights, in the Hobbsian vision.It exists because enough people agree it exists. But when you really start to think about it- it is as absurd a thing as can be. The idea that there exists basically just shy of 600 people who sit in a far distant capitol and pass "laws" that apply to anyone is silly. The idea that 200 years ago, some guys got together and put quill to paper and set in stone the construct by which my whole life is lived is laughable. I asked for nothing, and can give nothing back. I would, however, like what has been taken from me back. you really need to find an anarchist state and move there. the rest of us are perfectly content with the idea of a representative government.We could talk about money. That's fun because money is also an idea. great idea. but if you were spending all of your time pissing around in legal disputes, arguing about whether your law was better than the other 312M residents of this nation, you would have NO time left over to earn ANYTHING. that is just for starters. the whole reason we organize into societies is for division of labor. without it, we would be condemned to a life of subsistence farming and drudgery. instead, we can spend these joyous hours on a bulletin board, expressing our opinions. personally, i think it kicks ass. but if you don't, there is always Equatorial Gunea, where 2/3 of the adult population has no running water or electricity, and the president has a house in the Hamptons, and millions in his checking account.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 17:05:31 GMT -5
this discussion is evolving into a discussion of the social contract. for continued discussion on the parallels between freedom and slavery in the lowest levels of employment, continue here.......
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 18, 2013 17:18:40 GMT -5
*lol* I think the whole point is: that can be arranged. Just to point out: Paul is coming at this from the perspective that world governments, the US federal government included, are eventually going to implode in spectacular and cataclysmic fashion, leaving behind destruction, lawlessness and helplessness unimaginable to this generation. Personally I'm not sure what the future holds in store, but to an extent I agree with him. A splintered, wartorn (even foreign-occupied), ruined future North America certainly would not surprise me. You've claimed several times that you can't function under the assumption that this could come to pass. And fine. You're either right and Paul is foolish to worry, or you're wrong and ignorance is bliss. But suppose in a hypothetical alternate reality the US government does implode, all social services are eventually halted, chaos and sectarianism bloom into unrest, possibly civil war, charging like a freight train into the midst of three generations that know nothing but the warmth and protection of a cradle-to-grave womb. The ramifications are, in a word, devastating. Stories of the Great Depression circulate as tales of the "good ol' days" while people crowd together in urban shanties. Hypothetically assuming this future comes to pass, would you not share Paul's opinion? Would you not come to loathe the current unsustainable system, well-meaning and theoretically sound though it may be? Would you not call it a curse and a trap and an illusion? If you would do any of these things, then your only grievance with Paul is that you vehemently disagree on the direction the US is headed. And that particular disagreement isn't the subject of this thread or even closely related to it. Hence maybe you two can at long last find some common ground in this discussion. Just a thought.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 17:37:43 GMT -5
*lol* I think the whole point is: that can be arranged. Just to point out: Paul is coming at this from the perspective that world governments, the US federal government included, are eventually going to implode in spectacular and cataclysmic fashion, leaving behind destruction, lawlessness and helplessness unimaginable to this generation. Personally I'm not sure what the future holds in store, but to an extent I agree with him. A splintered, wartorn (even foreign-occupied), ruined future North America certainly would not surprise me. it won't surprise you to learn that i don't agree with that.You've claimed several times that you can't function under the assumption that this could come to pass. And fine. You're either right and Paul is foolish to worry, or you're wrong and ignorance is bliss. either way, i am not going to get an ulcer over it, and i am well prepared for anything.But suppose in a hypothetical alternate reality the US government does implode, all social services are eventually halted, chaos and sectarianism bloom into unrest, possibly civil war, charging like a freight train into the midst of three generations that know nothing but the warmth and protection of a cradle-to-grave womb. The ramifications are, in a word, devastating. Stories of the Great Depression circulate as tales of the "good ol' days" while people crowd together in urban shanties. Hypothetically assuming this future comes to pass, would you not share Paul's opinion? Would you not come to loathe the current unsustainable system, well-meaning and theoretically sound though it may be? Would you not call it a curse and a trap and an illusion? if government ceased to be in some future world, i would not insist that it were still there. does that answer your question? until then, the fact that we VOTE and generally obey laws is a fair indication of existence. and if you fail to pay your taxes, you will get another indication.If you would do any of these things, then your only grievance with Paul is that you vehemently disagree on the direction the US is headed. And that particular disagreement isn't the subject of this thread or even closely related to it. Hence maybe you two can at long last find some common ground in this discussion. Just a thought. sigh.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,560
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 18, 2013 18:51:27 GMT -5
How did something become your property?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 19:14:40 GMT -5
How did something become your property? don't get him started, bills. he might move to TX.
|
|
dumdeedoe
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 3, 2011 7:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 755
|
Post by dumdeedoe on Sept 18, 2013 20:22:59 GMT -5
So the right wing are becoming anarchists? I never saw that coming......
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 20:26:15 GMT -5
So the right wing are becoming anarchists? I never saw that coming...... Libertarians have a strong anarchical streak. but when it comes right down to it, they are not really anarchists- because anarchists are anti-authoritarian, by definition. the right wing will take orders from industrialists every time. they consider that consensual, even if they have no say in the orders whatsoever, and only a choice between masters. welcome to the New Dark Ages.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 18, 2013 22:01:19 GMT -5
So the right wing are becoming anarchists? I never saw that coming...... the right wing will take orders from industrialists every time. they consider that consensual, even if they have no say in the orders whatsoever, and only a choice between masters. welcome to the New Dark Ages.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 18, 2013 22:40:58 GMT -5
the right wing will take orders from industrialists every time. they consider that consensual, even if they have no say in the orders whatsoever, and only a choice between masters. welcome to the New Dark Ages. perfect, right?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 14:08:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2013 14:06:34 GMT -5
This thread has become pataphysical now.
We are no longer debating the meaning of "freedom," or "right," or "worth."
We are now debating the meaning of "is." Bill Clinton nods his approval.
Freedom and slavery are, in the sense Paul describes, what Paul says they are, and not because of any solipsistic bent on his part: he's actually correct.
Freedom and slavery are also what laterbloomer says they are, because she's considering the terms in a different sense.
They're also what djpolldancer claims, because he's talking in yet a third paradigm of 'is.'
When virgil supports my notion that there are no rights, he's taking my point that merely bleating "you took my rights away" does nothing - the cosmos says "what rights?" and goes on. When paul disagrees, he's making the valid point that we all understand what the claimed rights are and would choose, in a Kantian ideal, to operate as if the cosmos cared.
Similarly, when dj takes issue with my scandalous lack of gratitude for the enormous infringements my government places on my free will in exchange for a great many services generations of humanity never missed, it's in the context of presupposing the social contract in Rousseau's terms rather than considering it, as I do, the least worst option.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 14:08:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2013 14:21:53 GMT -5
It is manifestly the case that the current dynamic is unsustainable.
Any student of post-Hegelian dialecticism should have little difficulty accepting the hypothesis that all sociodynamic equilibria are unsustainable. There is no power relation - that is to say, there is no system of resource distribution - that can avoid creating a dissatisfied class. It is this dissatisfied class that are the drivers of all progress, the architects of Schumpeter's "creative destruction," the Hegelian antithesis of Veblen's "leisure classes." There will be haves and have nots, and there will be tensions within and between these groups.
Were it possible to so reduce the intelligence of Man that he were unaware of what either he or his neighbor possessed or lacked, then this wheel might be broken. But, as Proudhon observed, property is theft - we have only what we take, and the taking is a willed act (a praxeological act). Even the potlatches of the Native Americans take as their Rawlsian original position the ownership of the goods given away; they view the instrumental value of that property through a unique cultural prism, but this is not more absurd than the diamond-water paradox.
It is inevitable that there will be slaves, in whatever paradigm we define slavery. It is inevitable that there will be 'scut work,' in whatever paradigm we define scut work. This whole thread is comparing unpalatable inevitables to no worthwhile purpose - it is a profoundly bourgeois affectation, which is either a kinder or more snobbish echo of Paul's indictment a couple of pages ago.
"The cucumber is bitter. Put it aside. There are briars in the path. Avoid them. Do not ask, 'And why were such things made in the world?' " ~ Marcus Aurelius
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 14:08:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2013 14:23:09 GMT -5
The dreaded double post.
I replace what I had typed here with the fun fact that UNCOPYRIGHTABLE is one of the two equally longest English-language words in which no letter is repeated.
You are welcome.
|
|