Comments on: Freedomain Radio – Understanding Concepts

By: cmoleon

cmoleon — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

one of which could …
one of which could be incapable forever to even grasp, let alone aspire to the concept of freedom; maybe there even is, or will be, a hereditary genetical manifestation of such a mental illness or deficiency.

By: Technocratic

Technocratic — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

In this case, you …
In this case, you won’t have any reliable central authority with things like, omg LAWS and law enforcement. You’d have private yahoos who can afford to buy security and enforce their will on you anyway, but in a way much, much worse and unregulated than any liberal democracy.

In fact, the international community is yet another great example of anarchy in history. That doesn’t work either. Those who benefit would be those who marshaled wealth for self-defense and power projection.

By: Technocratic

Technocratic — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

And in the absence …
And in the absence of a government that is accountable to the people, you have factions that aren’t. Are you really so dense that you can’t comprehend what the would happen if you suddenly eliminate the central authority? Are you really so dumb that you think everyone will just hold hands and sing god koom-bai-ya? Absurd.

You will absolutely get the free for all playground I outlined. Government won’t go away, people won’t get along. You will just get shittier governments.

By: StrafingMoose

StrafingMoose — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

Indeed. And guess …
Indeed. And guess who’s got the most money? Yes, the institutions that grab 50% of my income. They got awesome WMDs too!

By: Technocratic

Technocratic — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

The best example of …
The best example of what anarchy would actually result in is mirrored in the schoolyard sans any authorities. Let to their own devices, you would get factions of bullies and powerful personalities. Except in real life, the bullies got guns and are often wealthy.
The more wealth and power you start from, the more of an advantage you will accrue in an anarchic society until you are powerful enough to enforce your will as a de facto warlord. More money can buy bigger weapons than others.

By: Technocratic

Technocratic — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:50 +0000

Anarchy doesn’t …
Anarchy doesn’t work precisely because it assumes fundamentally flawed premises about human nature. In a situation like Somalia, if you eliminate a reliable central authority, you get many more factions. Government won’t magically disappear with everyone living in harmony. You just get worse local governments controlled by something akin to feudal lords and gangs. He who has the most money and power will dominate the lesser groups.

This voluntary stuff sounds nice only superficially.

By: dietermaas

dietermaas — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:49 +0000

Well, behind your …
Well, behind your whole philosophical explanation, what I feel you are getting at, is the need for autonomy. I call that a need, that each person has. Self-determination. One of the most powerful and most important need that a human being has. The freedom of choice. This is my view on this: There is nobody, who could ever take my freedom of choice away. It isn’t possible.

By: BrutusCass

BrutusCass — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:49 +0000

@BrutusCass * …
@BrutusCass *Instead (not interested (got distracted while typing)

By: BrutusCass

BrutusCass — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:49 +0000

@Technocratic Such …
@Technocratic Such things happen due to the ignorance of the mass, now we have a problem a rational mind will ask about a solution, or do we just follow a best fit policy interested of evolving society in possitive manner?
Is this ignorant paraniod subservent greed based anti-social system the best we primative apes can come up with?

By: BrutusCass

BrutusCass — Mon, 31 May 2010 08:45:49 +0000

You put it so well, …
You put it so well, I will have to try to watch all your videos.