Print

[lordfly]

Make sure everyone you know is registered and is going to vote on Tuesday.

[Matt (formerly ML)]

Make sure everyone you know is registered and is going to vote on Tuesday.

You forgot to include this caveat:

...if you wish to submit your life to a mob of people you don't know, who are probably trying to steal the results of your productive work, and impose upon you their personal preferences about how you should live your one and only life, and who will rely on unthinking others to enforce their pathetic personal preferences upon you.


Go vote. Vote yourselves into a hole you can't climb out of.

[lordfly]

Voting is pointless! Shoot your neighbor for his pantry today!

[problem solver]

Voting is pointless! Shoot your neighbor for his pantry today!

LOL

[The Shaggy Marlin]

Embrace change...http://www.embracechange.org

[The Phoenix]

I'm the dork who registered to vote the day I turned 18. I was SO happy I finally was old enough to vote.

Embrace change...http://www.embracechange.org

 

That has got to be the coolest link. EVER.

[The Shaggy Marlin]

I'm the dork who registered to vote the day I turned 18. I was SO happy I finally was old enough to vote.
 

That has got to be the coolest link. EVER.

It's ok, we're not perfect.  Embrace change.

[Matt (formerly ML)]

Voting is pointless! Shoot your neighbor for his pantry today!

Voting is a long-shot bet that someone will shoot your neighbor on your behalf, and give you a slice of the corpse to curb your hunger.

Once again, your words reveal your heart.

It's only fair that I mention I mirrored my response on my blog:
http://rashynullplanet.com/blog/2008/09/28/vote-yourself-a-strip-of-yourself/

[lordfly]

Voting is a long-shot bet that someone will shoot your neighbor on your behalf, and give you a slice of the corpse to curb your hunger.

And anarchism is a short-term guarantee that the one with the largest gun wins the chips.

Who needs a neighborhood when you can just kill everyone and get all their stuff?

[Matt (formerly ML)]

And anarchism is a short-term guarantee that the one with the largest gun wins the chips.

Who needs a neighborhood when you can just kill everyone and get all their stuff?

Again you reveal your nature.

As for me, if the government dried up and blew away overnight, I'd go on one hell of a bender, then go about my usual business earning an honest living.

Thanks for letting me know in advance you're one of the thugs. Don't count on a lack of resistance to your predation.

[lordfly]

Thanks for failing to see past your myopic anarchist utopia, again.

Chances are if the government collapsed I'd be the first one killed for my body warmth.

My point was that your visions of a governmentless heaven fail to take into account what most Utopian ideals do: They utterly fail when brought up against sociopaths. People with no social qualms about breaking the rules, killing people, etc. About 1% of the total population is a sociopath. Out of 3100 members of MT, that means 31 members are sociopaths who wouldn't think twice about raping your family if they thought it'd be fun.

So with these reckless bastards running around your completely decentralized existence, who would be strong enough to stop them? Well, chances are, another sociopath, because I would reckon it would take a guy so inclined about 15 minutes before he had AN ARMY behind him. Society rewards sociopathic behavior to a point: Look at most horror stories involving bastard bosses and managers. Or cut-throat politicians.

Also, your anarchist fantasy has another problem going for it: No society has succeeded by being anarchistic. This isn't to say that some have existed, at some point, for a small period of time - I'm sure you have reams of evidence to show that the Ummbop tribe of northwestern Uganda or the Bgiroth tree-people of the unexplored Amazon are indeed properly anarchistic societies.

But that's the rub - these societies are backwards, and evolutionarily speaking, never reproduced or expanded. They are evolutionary dead-ends. This seems to provide somewhat compelling anecdotal evidence that primitive tribes living in the woods being scared of tigers is about as good as an anarchist society would be.

[Matt (formerly ML)]

Thanks for failing to see past your myopic anarchist utopia, again.

Chances are if the government collapsed I'd be the first one killed for my body warmth.

Man, that's pure speculation. I would stand at your side to prevent that.

My point was that your visions of a governmentless heaven fail to take into account what most Utopian ideals do: They utterly fail when brought up against sociopaths. People with no social qualms about breaking the rules, killing people, etc. About 1% of the total population is a sociopath. Out of 3100 members of MT, that means 31 members are sociopaths who wouldn't think twice about raping your family if they thought it'd be fun.

So with these reckless bastards running around your completely decentralized existence, who would be strong enough to stop them? Well, chances are, another sociopath, because I would reckon it would take a guy so inclined about 15 minutes before he had AN ARMY behind him. Society rewards sociopathic behavior to a point: Look at most horror stories involving bastard bosses and managers. Or cut-throat politicians.

Also, your anarchist fantasy has another problem going for it: No society has succeeded by being anarchistic. This isn't to say that some have existed, at some point, for a small period of time - I'm sure you have reams of evidence to show that the Ummbop tribe of northwestern Uganda or the Bgiroth tree-people of the unexplored Amazon are indeed properly anarchistic societies.

But that's the rub - these societies are backwards, and evolutionarily speaking, never reproduced or expanded. They are evolutionary dead-ends. This seems to provide somewhat compelling anecdotal evidence that primitive tribes living in the woods being scared of tigers is about as good as an anarchist society would be.

Again, don't count on a lack of resistance to coercion. Ever been in a gun store? Most courteous place on earth.

There is nothing utopian about human existence. There will always be people who desire and pursue the unearned.

Celtic Ireland existed as an anarchy for 1000 years, longer than most so-called societies:
http://tinyurl.com/3zmqr9
It wasn't perfect, but certainly humans have become so highly advanced and civilized since then that they can improve on that, can't they? Right? Can't they? I mean, you're certainly that advanced and civilized aren't you?

The US "democracy" will be lucky to see 300 years with the continuance of delegated coercion via voting.

Ask yourself: how you would deal with people without government? Voluntary association (you know, anarchy) is where it's at.

[lordfly]

I would deal with people without government by forming a government.

[Matt (formerly ML)]

I would deal with people without government by forming a government.

Check your premises.

You're a smart guy, Josh.

You must have a life-threatening reason to resort to dealing with people by force.

Scale down your view for a moment. How do you deal with your neighbors, or even your family? Voluntary association. Would you put a gun to your brother's head to make him pass the gravy? Of course you wouldn't. Why would you do that to me? I would never do that to you.