RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:03 pm
There cannot be a dictator without a government, a collective of complicit individuals, "cooperating," to bring coercive force to bear on those repressed by that government. Every government is a typical collective effort.
It is not possible for any individual to become a dictator as an individual. Dictators are only possible where there is some cooperative (complicit) collection of others to support the dictator.
Where do I start! Have you looked into who is the Tory government of the UK?
Have you even looked into the causes of the American Revolutionary War?
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
When I say "the individual" I refer to all human beings including those who are not part of the ruling elite. Market forces and certain unhealthy types of men tend to form the collective known as ruling elite unless democratic safeguards are in place.
No matter how wealthy an individual is, their wealth cannot force a single individual anywhere to do anything they do not choose to do. Only organized force (government) can be used to control others. Wealth can be used to bribe (lobby) governments to use their force in ways some wealthy might like, but there must first be an agency of force to bribe. It's not wealth that can harm anyone else, it is the agencies of force.
Most wealthy individuals have no use for government and are only interested in producing goods and services others desire and are willing to trade their goods and services for. There are millions of millionaires in this world you've never heard of who are no threat to anyone but benefit everyone. I have never understood this insidious hate people have for the successful of this world who make this world one worth living in.
Are there some bad wealthy people in the world? Of course. A few, most of whom have, "acquired," their wealth crookedly and are in bed with the political rulers, but there are thousands more bad individuals in this world who are nothing more than predators and parasites who keep the politicians in power.
If you are really concerned about some, "ruling elites," you would oppose democracy. It the democratic voting masses of ignorant second-handers that put politicians in power to be influenced by the crooked wealthy. Not millionaires.
Have you seen who are the UK Tory government?
Have you seen the cause of the American War of Independence?
Last edited by Belinda on Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:03 pm
There cannot be a dictator without a government, a collective of complicit individuals, "cooperating," to bring coercive force to bear on those repressed by that government. Every government is a typical collective effort.
It is not possible for any individual to become a dictator as an individual. Dictators are only possible where there is some cooperative (complicit) collection of others to support the dictator.
Where do I start! Have you looked into who is the Tory government of the UK?
Have you even looked into the causes of the American Revolutionary War?
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
When I say "the individual" I refer to all human beings including those who are not part of the ruling elite. Market forces and certain unhealthy types of men tend to form the collective known as ruling elite unless democratic safeguards are in place.
No matter how wealthy an individual is, their wealth cannot force a single individual anywhere to do anything they do not choose to do. Only organized force (government) can be used to control others. Wealth can be used to bribe (lobby) governments to use their force in ways some wealthy might like, but there must first be an agency of force to bribe. It's not wealth that can harm anyone else, it is the agencies of force.
Most wealthy individuals have no use for government and are only interested in producing goods and services others desire and are willing to trade their goods and services for. There are millions of millionaires in this world you've never heard of who are no threat to anyone but benefit everyone. I have never understood this insidious hate people have for the successful of this world who make this world one worth living in.
Are there some bad wealthy people in the world? Of course. A few, most of whom have, "acquired," their wealth crookedly and are in bed with the political rulers, but there are thousands more bad individuals in this world who are nothing more than predators and parasites who keep the politicians in power.
If you are really concerned about some, "ruling elites," you would oppose democracy. It the democratic voting masses of ignorant second-handers that put politicians in power to be influenced by the crooked wealthy. Not millionaires.
Have you seen who are the UK Tory government?
Have you seen the cause of the American War of Independence?
Putin's power is the power of wealth to make his reign of terror with all the expensive apparatus of police and punishment. He has killed effective democracy in Russia .
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:16 pm
So for you, morality is some kind of social ideology, and one's own life is of no particular purpose or value sans society? The name of that view is collectivism and it is used to justify any oppression of individuals for the, "good of society," or any, "others," who are in a position to decide what is good for them.
I deal with others all the time to our mutual benefit without ever being a threat of any harm to each other without requiring some agency of force dictating (with laws) how any individual chooses to live their life--and they all choose differently because everyone is different.
In your view, what should be done with those who do not agree?
so what your saying here is if some one doesn't agree with your views then they are wrong and immoral
No! I'm saying just the opposite. No one has to agree with me and how others choose to live their lives is none of my business (unless the choose to share it or are no direct physical threat to me). You are the one who thinks people need to be compelled to behave in certain ways.
DPMartin wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:23 pm
... according to you its okey to agree to receiving a loan and then not pay for it though you have the money. or its okey to join the army and swear to protect and then run from the enemies of those you swear to protect. or its okey to rob thy neighbor because you shouldn't be held to any agreed moral standard. sorry sounds less advanced in mental, or social development than is usual for an adult, to me.
First of all, anyone who joins an agency that has no other purpose than to destroy property and kill people has already surrendered any claim to virtue, and the lie that murdering, ruining, and impoverishing other is for the sake of some, "higher good," is a major reason for the worst of human horrors. Something which apparently doesn't bother you at all. If one has made the mistake of enlisting in some government's armed forces and realizes how evil it is and chooses to leave that institution of horror, he is a hero.
Secondly, only individuals who have no desire to have anything they have not produced by their own effort or traded what they have produced with others are truly virtuous or worthy of any association with others. They are never a threat of harm to anyone else and have no interest in others except whatever relationships they can individually and voluntarily enter into to their mutual benefit. Your so-called collectivist morality is just an excuse to oppress and use other individuals who, "do not agree," for the sake of the darlings of the social system. Your, "morality," is the fundamental principle on which all oppressive and cruel governments are founded.
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
That's what I say. Please do not attribute your own ideas of corrupt society to me.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
so what your saying here is if some one doesn't agree with your views then they are wrong and immoral
No! I'm saying just the opposite. No one has to agree with me and how others choose to live their lives is none of my business (unless the choose to share it or are no direct physical threat to me). You are the one who thinks people need to be compelled to behave in certain ways.
DPMartin wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:23 pm
... according to you its okey to agree to receiving a loan and then not pay for it though you have the money. or its okey to join the army and swear to protect and then run from the enemies of those you swear to protect. or its okey to rob thy neighbor because you shouldn't be held to any agreed moral standard. sorry sounds less advanced in mental, or social development than is usual for an adult, to me.
First of all, anyone who joins an agency that has no other purpose than to destroy property and kill people has already surrendered any claim to virtue, and the lie that murdering, ruining, and impoverishing other is for the sake of some, "higher good," is a major reason for the worst of human horrors. Something which apparently doesn't bother you at all. If one has made the mistake of enlisting in some government's armed forces and realizes how evil it is and chooses to leave that institution of horror, he is a hero.
Secondly, only individuals who have no desire to have anything they have not produced by their own effort or traded what they have produced with others are truly virtuous or worthy of any association with others. They are never a threat of harm to anyone else and have no interest in others except whatever relationships they can individually and voluntarily enter into to their mutual benefit. Your so-called collectivist morality is just an excuse to oppress and use other individuals who, "do not agree," for the sake of the darlings of the social system. Your, "morality," is the fundamental principle on which all oppressive and cruel governments are founded.
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
That's what I say. Please do not attribute your own ideas of corrupt society to me.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
If you see a contradiction, please point it out. I see no contradiction.
All collective (i.e. "formally orgnized," from governments to clubs) oranizations are ultimately harmful to individual human beings. Only informal cooperation entered into voluntarily by every individual involved in any human relationships, from business to social, are a benevolent ones. Where's the contradiction?
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 5:24 pm
No! I'm saying just the opposite. No one has to agree with me and how others choose to live their lives is none of my business (unless the choose to share it or are no direct physical threat to me). You are the one who thinks people need to be compelled to behave in certain ways.
First of all, anyone who joins an agency that has no other purpose than to destroy property and kill people has already surrendered any claim to virtue, and the lie that murdering, ruining, and impoverishing other is for the sake of some, "higher good," is a major reason for the worst of human horrors. Something which apparently doesn't bother you at all. If one has made the mistake of enlisting in some government's armed forces and realizes how evil it is and chooses to leave that institution of horror, he is a hero.
Secondly, only individuals who have no desire to have anything they have not produced by their own effort or traded what they have produced with others are truly virtuous or worthy of any association with others. They are never a threat of harm to anyone else and have no interest in others except whatever relationships they can individually and voluntarily enter into to their mutual benefit. Your so-called collectivist morality is just an excuse to oppress and use other individuals who, "do not agree," for the sake of the darlings of the social system. Your, "morality," is the fundamental principle on which all oppressive and cruel governments are founded.
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
That's what I say. Please do not attribute your own ideas of corrupt society to me.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
If you see a contradiction, please point it out. I see no contradiction.
All collective (i.e. "formally orgnized," from governments to clubs) oranizations are ultimately harmful to individual human beings. Only informal cooperation entered into voluntarily by every individual involved in any human relationships, from business to social, are a benevolent ones. Where's the contradiction?
There have been men who exert power over others and who were also altruistic, but such men are exceptional.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
If you see a contradiction, please point it out. I see no contradiction.
All collective (i.e. "formally orgnized," from governments to clubs) oranizations are ultimately harmful to individual human beings. Only informal cooperation entered into voluntarily by every individual involved in any human relationships, from business to social, are a benevolent ones. Where's the contradiction?
There have been men who exert power over others and who were also altruistic, but such men are exceptional.
Altruism is just an excuse to enslave some for the sake of others. There is hardly a more evil idea than altruism.
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 5:24 pm
No! I'm saying just the opposite. No one has to agree with me and how others choose to live their lives is none of my business (unless the choose to share it or are no direct physical threat to me). You are the one who thinks people need to be compelled to behave in certain ways.
First of all, anyone who joins an agency that has no other purpose than to destroy property and kill people has already surrendered any claim to virtue, and the lie that murdering, ruining, and impoverishing other is for the sake of some, "higher good," is a major reason for the worst of human horrors. Something which apparently doesn't bother you at all. If one has made the mistake of enlisting in some government's armed forces and realizes how evil it is and chooses to leave that institution of horror, he is a hero.
Secondly, only individuals who have no desire to have anything they have not produced by their own effort or traded what they have produced with others are truly virtuous or worthy of any association with others. They are never a threat of harm to anyone else and have no interest in others except whatever relationships they can individually and voluntarily enter into to their mutual benefit. Your so-called collectivist morality is just an excuse to oppress and use other individuals who, "do not agree," for the sake of the darlings of the social system. Your, "morality," is the fundamental principle on which all oppressive and cruel governments are founded.
Only individuals who seek nothing but what they can earn or produce and trade with other producers can cooperate in a way that benefits everyone involved in that cooperation, because it is entirely voluntary. Every other collective operation is not cooperation, but complicity in some corrupt effort to control others.
That's what I say. Please do not attribute your own ideas of corrupt society to me.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
If you see a contradiction, please point it out. I see no contradiction.
one reading your postings would expect that response. so either you deny it even though you can see it or you don't realize and can't see it. as in there are those who see what they believe and there are those who believe what they see. either way its futile to continue this conversation.
you do know you just finished contradicting yourself.
If you see a contradiction, please point it out. I see no contradiction.
one reading your postings would expect that response. so either you deny it even though you can see it or you don't realize and can't see it. as in there are those who see what they believe and there are those who believe what they see. either way its futile to continue this conversation.
I asked you to point out the contradiction. I'm neither omniscient or infallible. I could certainly have inadvertently said something that contradicted something else I said and would like to correct it if I have.
Just point out the two things I've said that contradicted each other, for example, "Here you said such'n'such is true, but there you said such'n'such is not true."
I think you may not have actually identified a contradiction, else you would have pointed it out.
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:31 am
I find myself forgetting many things, places I've been, things I've done, people I've known. What happens when I completely forget everything? What happens when I die? If there is being after death, then what could/would it be like without any memories or sensory experience?
It is up to you and your proper judgment of yourself. You might return to this world forgetting everything or live in the higher worlds until you get extremely bored and your life turns into Hell. At that time you are free to come to this world.
