Is Government Good?

[weebag]

Show me somewhere on planet earth without government?

So you are saying that it is impossible NOT to have Government? That ulitmately, in one way or another, Goverment will always come about.

So thefore Injins dream (and yours?) is impossible.

So, get over it and get on with making goverment as responsible and accountable as possible - overwise you are just wasting your energy.

[Injin]

Not the point. I think everyone here would agree that there is too much govt.

It is necessary to a certain extent, but it's gotten way out of hand.

The best way to fix it is to fix the monetary system so that the bankers don't have such an advantage.

Do you know why it's gotten out of hand?

Because there is no way of stopping it once it's set up, unless there is a civil war or revolution or total economci collapse.

[SMAC67]

So you are saying that it is impossible NOT to have Government? That ulitmately, in one way or another, Goverment will always come about.

So thefore Injins dream (and yours?) is impossible.

So, get over it and get on with making goverment as responsible and accountable as possible - overwise you are just wasting your energy.

It exists because people like you want it, and will kill to have it. I don't want it, you would kill me if you had the chance.

[Alan B'Stard MP]

So you are saying that it is impossible NOT to have Government? That ulitmately, in one way or another, Goverment will always come about.

So thefore Injins dream (and yours?) is impossible.

So, get over it and get on with making goverment as responsible and accountable as possible - overwise you are just wasting your energy.

+1

[Alan B'Stard MP]

It exists because people like you want it, and will kill to have it. I don't want it, you would kill me if you had the chance.

Yes. Anarchy would be the best chance.

I'll add you to the list for when that window arises.

[HumanAction]

It exists because people like you want it, and will kill to have it. I don't want it, you would kill me if you had the chance.

Isn't that simply an admission that you are essentially wrong? If some portion of humanity wants government ( some portion always seems to ) and is capable of creating it then it is afterall inevitable. Or is your case that if only humans weren't human then your ideas would pan out? Odd because I'm pretty sure that even socialism would work just fine given the ability to chose their ideal of humanity as raw material.

[weebag]

It exists because people like you want it, and will kill to have it. I don't want it, you would kill me if you had the chance.

So, as I said, its pointless - Goverment will always exisit.

You might as well be arguing that we should all be able to fly.

Not possible.

[bill still]

Oh, that's just tooooo funny.

Fun to be a part of this dry Brit humor.

Yes. Anarchy would be the best chance.

I'll add you to the list for when that window arises.

[SMAC67]

You want it because you have been programmed to want it. When government ceases to exist people will revert to their natural state, not the captive brain dead animal state that we are currently in. Government is a by-product of civilisation. Civilisation is a temporary state of affairs.

As for me, I'll do what every brain dead captive animal has done within industrial society. As my standard of living drops I will insist the government (whoever it is), redistributes wealth from others on this planet. Eventually they will have to take it from those in the UK, I have no problems with that.

[Lone_Twin]

Do you know why it's gotten out of hand?

Because there is no way of stopping it once it's set up, unless there is a civil war or revolution or total economci collapse.

I think there is merit to this argument. I used to think that what was missing from the uk would be a goverment limiting constitution. I strongly believed, like some people here, in the possibility of a small benevolent govt.

But then I looked to the United States, where a whole group of some of the brightest men of their age could not draft something which effectively limited government power for more than a few decades.

Bill's powerless pleas in this thread do nothing more for me than confirm the inevitability to state growth and self interest. There is for me therefore only one logical conclusion. Even if it dosnt look pretty.

[weebag]

You want it because you have been programmed to want it. When government ceases to exist people will revert to their natural state, not the captive brain dead animal state that we are currently in. Government is a by-product of civilisation. Civilisation is a temporary state of affairs.

As for me, I'll do what every brain dead captive animal has done within industrial society. As my standard of living drops I will insist the government (whoever it is), redistributes wealth from others on this planet. Eventually they will have to take it from those in the UK, I have no problems with that.

Ahh, I see.

You are nuts!

[Stars]

That'd be the capital they created but have to bargain for access to right? Isn't sounding really very equitable.

No, as i explained, the labour is often only one component in the creation of new capital, if the labour is the only sizeable contribution, the resultant capital ends up belonging to the labourer

Edited August 11, 2009 by Stars

[SMAC67]

Ahh, I see.

You are nuts!

Of course I'm nuts, I am civilised. And like anyone who is civilised I will support any government that redistributes wealth in my direction. Of course, you don't do this coming voting day, do you?

The problem is, well, the economy is melting down, and the size of the pie is getting smaller, and that means that redistribution of wealth is going to be a bit more basic (and violent). The dispossesed will not be pleased, you just have to make sure you are not part of the group that will be scapegoated.

As for government, the most evil creation of mankind, end of.

[Lone_Twin]

If you cant see the funny side when a poster who consistently denies the existence of nations falls into the trap of referring to a country himself, particularly in the context of wanting to say someone else is in denial, then I am only staggered by your sheer lack of a sense of humour.

Its not a lack of humour it's pointing out that your position is foolish.

We both agree unicorns don't exist right? But you can still tell me a story about Unicorns and I will understand what you are talking about.

[Alan B'Stard MP]

Its not a lack of humour it's pointing out that your position is foolish.

We both agree unicorns don't exist right? But you can still tell me a story about Unicorns and I will understand what you are talking about.

Yes but we heard it 20.000 times before.

Some of us just want to talk about the map at not the terrain - and without incessant interruption - and without scrolling past twenty posts of 'you have chosen to ignore'

Other boards have banned him - why this one has not seen fit I don't know.

He's has helped to drive some very knowledgable posters from this board.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Alan B'Stard MP

[sdc395]

Its not a lack of humour it's pointing out that your position is foolish.

We both agree unicorns don't exist right? But you can still tell me a story about Unicorns and I will understand what you are talking about.

This is irrelevant. The fact that the word has a well understood meaning and that its concept (sovereignty) is respected (most of the time) by the majority makes countries as real as any intangible thing can possibly be.

But that's irrelevant too. Fact is, while Injin may not be able to live in a place without government, he could live in a place with ineffective government (which would be similar).

Edited August 11, 2009 by sdc395

[Lone_Twin]

This is irrelevant. The fact that the word has a well understood meaning and that its concept (sovereignty) is respected (most of the time) by the majority makes countries as real as any intangible thing can possibly be.

But that's irrelevant too. Fact is, while Injin may not be able to live in a place without government, he could live in a place with ineffective government (which would be similar).

Unicorns have a very well understood meaning. I bet I could get almost any child to draw one.

It does not make them any more "real" in actual fact. Think I understand the point you are making and in a way I agree with you the collective belief of people is what makes countries very very real. (people ostensibly die on behalf of these made up things for goodness sake).

But if we all woke tomorrow not believing in countries they would cease to exist. The same is not true of Mt Fuji.

This makes countries a figment of our collective imagination and not real.

I spend all day pretending they are though, please don't think I am loopy.

[sdc395]

But if we all woke tomorrow not believing in countries they would cease to exist. The same is not true of Mt Fuji.

True enough. But unless we all woke tomorrow not believing in countries and without our innate sense of tribalism, it wouldn't be long before the concept was reborn along with a government of some sort. It's human nature.

[Lone_Twin]

True enough. But unless we all woke tomorrow not believing in countries and without our innate sense of tribalism, it wouldn't be long before the concept was reborn along with a government of some sort. It's human nature.

Possibly true but with respect that is a totally different point to whether they are "real" or not.

Lots of popular concepts have through the ages been thought to have been "innate", racial or sexual superiority for example. But it turns out the decendants of the Mayans arent wicked souless non-humans devouring their way through babies and most women can do as well in 99% of jobs as men (physical strength aside).

Tribalism and its great great granddaughter the nation state was an idea that worked in its day, it was useful, just as Theism helped when you were trying to understand yet another senseless death from the million and one things that killed people before modern medicine or why some years the rains didnt come.

But we can be better than that. We can understand our world and co-operate freely to create real wealth without a coercive state taking our money, bombing our neighbours and controling our lives.

Idealistic yes, but not a bad ideal to have I would venture.

[weebag]

Injins problem (apart from the drugs and the boredom of posting on an internet forum all day) seems to be that 'reality' is 'higher' (whatever that means), than concept.

Its ****** - the two can live happily side by side and can be equally as important as each other.

Just Injin (and others) seem to get off (maybe its the only release they get?) by repeating the same mantra and not adressing any of the issues.

If countries exist or not does not matter. The people with the biggest guns / capacity for violence always rule - unless an overwhelming force (Government / Mafia / local warlord) stops them.

The big difference is we have a say in who our government is. Its not perfect, but better than the alternative/

If you guys really really believed that no goverment was the solution, you would live in any number of countries that have no government. Only they dont exisit either do they? Coz SOMEONE fills the vacumn and forms some sort of government - only often it isnt the relatively benign government we have - and have had for centuries.

But you like the confort zone.

You like to whinge and moan and blame anybody and everybody else.

You are armchair warriors.

[sdc395]

Possibly true but with respect that is a totally different point to whether they are "real" or not.

I'd kinda moved on from the "are they real or not" debate since the consequences of people's believe in the concept are certainly real enough.

Lots of popular concepts have through the ages been thought to have been "innate", racial or sexual superiority for example. But it turns out the decendants of the Mayans arent wicked souless non-humans devouring their way through babies and most women can do as well in 99% of jobs as men (physical strength aside).

What makes tribalism different from ideas of racial or sexual superiority (but not theism), in my opinion, is that tribalism was born of evolution and serves an evolutionary purpose. Humans, after all, are not the only species to exhibit tribal behaviour. I'm not aware of racism or sexism in other animals (although I'd be intrigued to learn otherwise).

But we can be better than that. We can understand our world and co-operate freely to create real wealth without a coercive state taking our money, bombing our neighbours and controling our lives.

Idealistic yes, but not a bad ideal to have I would venture.

I'm all for bettering ourselves and human society but I think you're more optimistic about our prospects of success than me. I see many of the actions of Government as a scaled up version of our primitive tribe mentality.

Edited August 11, 2009 by sdc395

[Alan B'Stard MP]

Injins problem (apart from the drugs and the boredom of posting on an internet forum all day) seems to be that 'reality' is 'higher' (whatever that means), than concept.

Its ****** - the two can live happily side by side and can be equally as important as each other.

Just Injin (and others) seem to get off (maybe its the only release they get?) by repeating the same mantra and not adressing any of the issues.

If countries exist or not does not matter. The people with the biggest guns / capacity for violence always rule - unless an overwhelming force (Government / Mafia / local warlord) stops them.

The big difference is we have a say in who our government is. Its not perfect, but better than the alternative/

If you guys really really believed that no goverment was the solution, you would live in any number of countries that have no government. Only they dont exisit either do they? Coz SOMEONE fills the vacumn and forms some sort of government - only often it isnt the relatively benign government we have - and have had for centuries.

But you like the confort zone.

You like to whinge and moan and blame anybody and everybody else.

You are armchair warriors.

Nothing wrong with concepts. If the majority hold such concepts it pays to fall in line and tip your hat to reach your goals. It also did. It always will.

[Stars]

Someone should set up a thread 'is injin good?', so the people who want to talk about injin can hack the issue out

[Alan B'Stard MP]

Someone should set up a thread 'is injin good?', so the people who want to talk about injin can hack the issue out

Just sick of listening to irrelevant garbage.

Could be solved by a decent ignore function that didnt tell you that 20 of the 21 posts in a thread were being ignored and I would I really like to listen in.

[Lone_Twin]

I'd kinda moved on from the "are they real or not" debate since the consequences of people's believe in the concept are certainly real enough.

I'm happy enough to accept that as your opinion but that was not your original position, which was that conceptual states were as real as any tangible object.

What makes tribalism different from ideas of racial or sexual superiority (but not theism), in my opinion, is that tribalism was born of evolution and serves an evolutionary purpose. Humans, after all, are not the only species to exhibit tribal behaviour. I'm not aware of racism or sexism in other animals (although I'd be intrigued to learn otherwise).

Sexism provides an evolutionary purpose, if I can keep a woman compliant, at home and full of babies I am likely to have more offspring which are more likely to be mine. Likewise the subjugation of other people on the basis of clasification of "otherness" (on racial grounds as any other) allows me to increase my material wealth for both status and sustainment purposes.

We can always make up reasons and excuses for believing in nonsense and acting irrationality. Theism and creationism have continued to exisit in defiance of logic and the scientific method.Just down the road from where I sit there is a dedicated building where quite a large number of people sit trying to communicate telepathically with a 2000 year old invisible jewish zombie to pledge their allegiance to him and beg that he grant their wishes.

I'm all for bettering ourselves and human society but I think you're more optimistic about our prospects of success than me. I see many of the actions of Government as a scaled up version of our primitive tribe mentality.

Who said it would be easy?