The Blame Game

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The Blame Game

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:26 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:11 am
simplicity wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 9:17 pm If you have studied economics to some degree, you might understand that capitalism, like most complex systems, ...
How can you write that with a straight face. If you've studied economics you know capitalism is not a political system (or any other kind of system) but a view of economic relationships, namely between produced value and reservinf wealth for future production, (i.e. not eating the seed grain).

There may be politcal ideologies that intend to promote capitalist views, but there is no capitalist political system. The most common political systems in most of the world today are some variations of democracy. Capitalism is incompatible with democracy, which is why there has never been a country where capitalism was freely practiced, not even in the United States.
Whereas [technically] you are correct, capitalism cannot operate if it were not for a expansive set of legal doctrines [property rights, contract law, etc.]. Therefore, like all systems, it is intimately tied into the political system of which representative democracy seems to be the best fit.

And remember, in the short-term [at least], the political usurps the economic.
Actually, capitalism, is an economic function that can only operate where there are no government restrictions or controls at all. The belief that capitalism requires some kind of coercive agency (a government) to function is an Austrian school or Randian perversion of capitalism as a social condition. There is, at present, a very large capitalist network throughout the world operating successfully totally outside any political system. It's called the underground or black market (also called the "shadow economy") and in many countries is over fifty percent of the entire economy. Even under the most oppressive governments, the existence of the societies within those countries depends on whatever capitalist elements are able to exist, though very poorly.
promethean75
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by promethean75 »

RC stop playin u know three quarters of these conservatives talkin bout capitalism is so great would be dead in two weeks if the world went pure capitalism.

Those cocksuckers need the goddamn government more than the proletariat does.
simplicity
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:03 pm Actually, capitalism, is an economic function that can only operate where there are no government restrictions or controls at all. The belief that capitalism requires some kind of coercive agency (a government) to function is an Austrian school or Randian perversion of capitalism as a social condition.
Perhaps in the ideal world but not on this planet. You get more than two human adults together and all hell breaks loose.

How could you possibly have a capitalist system in place with formal laws?

And your example of the workings of a black market does not hold water as underground markets use the physical/financial infrastructure put in place by the system. Capitalism developed when it did because of the support systems that grew-up around it. These are all symbiotic [as are all things in nature]. A perfect example is how drug cartels have ALWAYS used the banks to launder their profits.

No man [nor system] is an island.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 13396
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk »

35D95C80-C94C-41FE-981D-AD2404D1DD78.jpeg
35D95C80-C94C-41FE-981D-AD2404D1DD78.jpeg (61.05 KiB) Viewed 361 times
Last edited by henry quirk on Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The Blame Game

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 11:53 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:03 pm Actually, capitalism, is an economic function that can only operate where there are no government restrictions or controls at all. The belief that capitalism requires some kind of coercive agency (a government) to function is an Austrian school or Randian perversion of capitalism as a social condition.
Perhaps in the ideal world but not on this planet. You get more than two human adults together and all hell breaks loose.
It depends on the humans. Only humans who believe they have a right to something (or anything) simply because they were born and have no scruples against taking what they want from others, (or having a government do it for them), to have what the believe, "they have a right to." end up in physical conflict with others. Are you one of those?

Human beings who know they have no right to, (and therefore no desire for), anything they have not produced or earned by their own effort, either by producing it themselves or trading what they have produced for what others like themselves have produced, have no conflict with others. They know and only desire relationships with others that are totally voluntary and to their mutual benefit. You, apparently are not on of those, or you would know conflict is not inevitable.
simplicity wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 11:53 pm And your example of the workings of a black market does not hold water as underground markets use the physical/financial infrastructure put in place by the system.
As a matter of fact, they don't. True producers will use whatever exists, when they can, but the underground economy has much of it's own structure that is entirely independent of any government agencies, even it's own banking and money transfer methods that are completely invisible. (Read about Hawala, as one example.)
simplicity wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 11:53 pm Capitalism developed when it did because of the support systems that grew-up around it. These are all symbiotic [as are all things in nature]. A perfect example is how drug cartels have ALWAYS used the banks to launder their profits.
You can equate what drug cartels do with capitalism? I'm afraid you really don't know what capitalism is.
simplicity wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 11:53 pm No man [nor system] is an island.
All, "systems," are evil to some extent to individual human beings, because every system places the source of values in something (the state, society, the community, mankind, etc. etc.) outside individual human beings who are regarded is expendable means to whatever the system is supposed to achieve.

Only those who do not choose to be part of any, "contrived system," (government) only dealing with others in totally voluntary relationships to their mutual benefit are benevolent human beings that can be of real value to each other, fully enjoying those relationships. Everyone else is, to some degree, a parasite or predator, using phrases like, "no man is an island," to justify their invasive interference in others' lives.

You have no idea how much you enjoy in your life is owed to those whose who lives are lived outside of and independently of any government system.
simplicity
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pm Perhaps in the ideal world but not on this planet. You get more than two human adults together and all hell breaks loose.
It depends on the humans. Only humans who believe they have a right to something (or anything) simply because they were born and have no scruples against taking what they want from others, (or having a government do it for them), to have what the believe, "they have a right to." end up in physical conflict with others. Are you one of those?

Human beings who know they have no right to, (and therefore no desire for), anything they have not produced or earned by their own effort, either by producing it themselves or trading what they have produced for what others like themselves have produced, have no conflict with others. They know and only desire relationships with others that are totally voluntary and to their mutual benefit. You, apparently are not on of those, or you would know conflict is not inevitable.[/quote]
Remember, you live in a "something for nothing" world.

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmAs a matter of fact, they don't. True producers will use whatever exists, when they can, but the underground economy has much of it's own structure that is entirely independent of any government agencies, even it's own banking and money transfer methods that are completely invisible. (Read about Hawala, as one example.)
Are we talking about capitalism among three people or in the world as we know it?
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmYou can equate what drug cartels do with capitalism? I'm afraid you really don't know what capitalism is.
Explain.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmAll, "systems," are evil to some extent to individual human beings, because every system places the source of values in something (the state, society, the community, mankind, etc. etc.) outside individual human beings who are regarded is expendable means to whatever the system is supposed to achieve.

Only those who do not choose to be part of any, "contrived system," (government) only dealing with others in totally voluntary relationships to their mutual benefit are benevolent human beings that can be of real value to each other, fully enjoying those relationships. Everyone else is, to some degree, a parasite or predator, using phrases like, "no man is an island," to justify their invasive interference in others' lives.

You have no idea how much you enjoy in your life is owed to those whose who lives are lived outside of and independently of any government system.
Is there anything else you would like to tell me about myself? And what you are saying is super-basic stuff. Anything else to offer that might lend some insight?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The Blame Game

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:29 pm Perhaps in the ideal world but not on this planet. You get more than two human adults together and all hell breaks loose.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pm It depends on the humans. Only humans who believe they have a right to something (or anything) simply because they were born and have no scruples against taking what they want from others, (or having a government do it for them), to have what the believe, "they have a right to." end up in physical conflict with others. Are you one of those?

Human beings who know they have no right to, (and therefore no desire for), anything they have not produced or earned by their own effort, either by producing it themselves or trading what they have produced for what others like themselves have produced, have no conflict with others. They know and only desire relationships with others that are totally voluntary and to their mutual benefit. You, apparently are not on of those, or you would know conflict is not inevitable.
Remember, you live in a "something for nothing" world.
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. There is no, "something for nothing."
simplicity wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:29 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmAs a matter of fact, they don't. True producers will use whatever exists, when they can, but the underground economy has much of it's own structure that is entirely independent of any government agencies, even it's own banking and money transfer methods that are completely invisible. (Read about Hawala, as one example.)
Are we talking about capitalism among three people or in the world as we know it?
I'm talking about millions of millionaires and a few thousand billionaires who produce most of the real wealth in this world. It's why they are, "The Privileged."
simplicity wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 8:29 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmAll, "systems," are evil to some extent to individual human beings, because every system places the source of values in something (the state, society, the community, mankind, etc. etc.) outside individual human beings who are regarded is expendable means to whatever the system is supposed to achieve.

Only those who do not choose to be part of any, "contrived system," (government) only dealing with others in totally voluntary relationships to their mutual benefit are benevolent human beings that can be of real value to each other, fully enjoying those relationships. Everyone else is, to some degree, a parasite or predator, using phrases like, "no man is an island," to justify their invasive interference in others' lives.

You have no idea how much you enjoy in your life is owed to those whose who lives are lived outside of and independently of any government system.
Is there anything else you would like to tell me about myself? And what you are saying is super-basic stuff. Anything else to offer that might lend some insight?
I know nothing about you at all, only what you've chosen to say are your views, which is all I am addressing. I'm not in the business of judging others or what they choose to believe or how they choose to live. There are practical relationships between one's beliefs, actions, and the consequeces of those choices which I sometime point out, but otherwise, I'm content for all others to believe and do whatever they like.

I know that anyone who believes there can be some system put in place that will produce the kind of society they believe one ought to be is pursuing an impossible ideal, and I know whatever one is going to have and enjoy in this life they must pursue and achieve by their own effort else be something less than fully human. But I entertain no illusions about what most people will choose to believe and pursue and all of history testifies to it. Humanity, collectively, will always choose oppression and war and only those individuals who choose not to be part of those collective choices will escape those consequences.

If I have any objective in my discussions it's to let individual's know they can live successful, happy, fulfilled lives in this world and do not have to be enslaved to any state or system if they choose noot to be, but I'm not trying to convince anyone to make any choice or believe anything they don't want to.
simplicity
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 10:29 pm
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. There is no, "something for nothing."
Of course there isn't...but that doesn't stop anybody from attempting to get it [and many are quite happy with their free lunch (paid for by others, naturally)].
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pm I'm talking about millions of millionaires and a few thousand billionaires who produce most of the real wealth in this world. It's why they are, "

Is it really the billionaires who "produce" the wealth or do they just happen to be a the right place at the right time. I am all for entrepreneurship, but not for the corporate structure that simply funnels wealth produced to the top. Capitalism in its present form is way too top heavy.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmAll, "systems," are evil to some extent to individual human beings, because every system places the source of values in something (the state, society, the community, mankind, etc. etc.) outside individual human beings who are regarded is expendable means to whatever the system is supposed to achieve.

Only those who do not choose to be part of any, "contrived system," (government) only dealing with others in totally voluntary relationships to their mutual benefit are benevolent human beings that can be of real value to each other, fully enjoying those relationships. Everyone else is, to some degree, a parasite or predator, using phrases like, "no man is an island," to justify their invasive interference in others' lives.

You have no idea how much you enjoy in your life is owed to those whose who lives are lived outside of and independently of any government system.
I agree completely with what you wrote excepting the last sentence where once again you speculate on what I know. You have no clue what I know.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmI know nothing about you at all, only what you've chosen to say are your views, which is all I am addressing. I'm not in the business of judging others or what they choose to believe or how they choose to live. There are practical relationships between one's beliefs, actions, and the consequeces of those choices which I sometime point out, but otherwise, I'm content for all others to believe and do whatever they like.
That's better.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmI know that anyone who believes there can be some system put in place that will produce the kind of society they believe one ought to be is pursuing an impossible ideal, and I know whatever one is going to have and enjoy in this life they must pursue and achieve by their own effort else be something less than fully human. But I entertain no illusions about what most people will choose to believe and pursue and all of history testifies to it. Humanity, collectively, will always choose oppression and war and only those individuals who choose not to be part of those collective choices will escape those consequences.
Tell that to the tens of millions of innocent people slaughtered in WWll.
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:40 pmIf I have any objective in my discussions it's to let individual's know they can live successful, happy, fulfilled lives in this world and do not have to be enslaved to any state or system if they choose not to be, but I'm not trying to convince anyone to make any choice or believe anything they don't want to.
Aren't we the idealist? You under-estimate the influence the system has on each of us [no matter how independent we see ourselves].
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am

Re: The Blame Game

Post by Scott Mayers »

simplicity wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 9:17 pm The problem with blaming capitalism for all of the world's problems is that it diverts attention from the way things really are, that is, putting efforts towards solving complex multi-dimensional problems along with acknowledging multiple issues that are just part of our nature and will never be eradicated [inequality being the poster child for the later condition].

If you have studied economics to some degree, you might understand that capitalism, like most complex systems, comes with a plethora of issues, contradictions, and successes, as well. This is an economic system that has generated incredible social wealth and transformed entire societies in a manner of decades. China [although a economic basket-case because of their excesses] is a perfect example. Who could have pictured contemporary Shanghai in 1980?

All of the problems that exist today have existed throughout history [albeit in different forms/degrees]. As a matter of fact, I am not sure there are any issues that can be placed at capitalism's doorstep. After all, capitalism is an economic system made up of people. What makes this system so much more advanced is that it incorporates democratic principles [the market determining success/failure] and presents opportunity for nearly anybody to participate at all levels.

Like any complex system, capitalism has it's contradictions, but the actual design of the system is a far cry ahead of what preceded [systems based on family, race, caste, gender, etc.]. Capitalism cares not for the color of a person's skin, their religion, nor any other personal characteristics, only their ability to uphold their financial obligations under law.

Of course, there are individuals, groups, and societies that played the system for their own gain, but this is what human beings have done from the beginning and since we are in a particularly ugly phase at the moment, this tendency for massive corruption does not appear as if it going to be selected out of human behavior any time soon. It's just the way we seem to behave in groups.

I would be interested in hearing from those [and there seem to be a fair amount of anti-capitalism sentiment here] who believe that if you could somehow change to a different economic system, human behavior would change [and why that would be the case]. In other words, is it systems that make people do what they do or is it human nature that would turn every system into 'new and improved' shit, different day sort of thing?

And please...if you don't have anything constructive to add, refrain. Thanks.
You cannot credit some system that you NEVER had any other experience outside of propaganda against the what is NOT the case. Capitalism in its purist form is what people are against: the belief that there should not be a LIMIT to wealth gain while simultaneously that the poor should be exploited by their desperations. This is NOT equal power in trading and make the extreme capitalist a THIEF of the Earth's 'free' values where they exist. That is, the Earth PROVIDES us with 'free' energy that gets 'capitalized' by arrogant fucks thinking they have some God-given 'right' to OWN these resources.

Note that the advantage of the invisible hand is only as good as we have means to assure that no monopolies exist. But the first thing that the capitalist would do is to defund any possible means for policing of them exclusively and USE the public policing as their OWN means to rule.

FACT: we cannot KEEP being capitalistic forms of government in the future regardless without the expectation of using wars as a means to CULL the overpopulation. This makes the capitalists dependent upon things like war or purges to do this. Wars are also the most profitable attraction to them and so this ideal could ONLY continue to exist if war persists.

FACT: unless you could actually PROVE that all people can be equally successful under capitalism, it is irrelevant that SOME succeed well. The Western world continues to exist by exploitation of the poor ELSEWHERE, including those socialist countries. WE are the ones that do what it takes to MAKE those countries fail by DENYING trade with them. It should be no surprise that those countries will 'fail' in economic contrast because the selfish West is ASSURING they fail. As such, this is further reason that you cannot credit capitalism; it intentionally IMPOSES the failure of rationalized systems that care for ALL people.

Evolution does NOT 'favor' PROGRESS, it favors mere SURVIVAL, and where it is reasonable to note that capitalism is akin to Natural Evolution (economically), it too only favors the majority to suffer in order for the deluded profiteering minorities to think that EVERYONE 'wins'. SUCCESS for all is NOT NATURAL! The only way to go against this nature is to advance it using intellectual means to distribute the values of this 'free' Earth to all of us. It is NOT 'free' when you have some dicks DICTATING their superior religious right to own it all up.

I am not against being wealthy. I am against the FACT that GREED is the more NATURAL condition that assures ANYONE will 'addictively' be more abusive in conserving it. Most people, just like most animals SUFFER in Nature. Why should we NOT use our intellectual capacity to try to combat this tendency? That is, we can steer evolution to be less greedy. It is still 'natural' for us to do this even though it goes against the 'invisible hand' of nature apart from us to progress beyond our normal proclivities.
promethean75
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by promethean75 »

"some dicks DICTATING their superior religious right to own it all up." - Scott Mayers, On the Nature of Ruling Class Dicks


"It was now expedient for theorists to transform the earlier personified powers of the 'gods' into impersonal 'forces' and 'laws' in order to provide a more relevant and persuasive rationale for these new forms of class domination (wherein kings and queens no longer ruled, these having been replaced by oligarchies, dictatorships, or early forms of republican government). Warring, envious and capricious gods (which in effect helped rationalise the interpersonal rivalries between warring royal families) had to be tamed and transformed into the aforementioned impersonal forces, principles and laws. Even so, where necessary the latter were still under the control either of a single Supreme 'Deity', or a Supreme Rational Principle, an Absolute. Naturally, a properly ordered Polis had to reflect a similarly 'rational' cosmic order.

Nevertheless, this change still preserved the anthropomorphic and animistic overtones of the old way of seeing things --, even if this was now much harder to see.

Once more, this novel and class-motivated world-view was clearly aimed at demonstrating why nature and society had to be the way they were, linking the power of the State to the necessary structure of 'Being'.

Hegemony so easily 'justified' by hermeneutics.

[It is worth recalling here that "hermeneutics" is derived from the Greek God Hermes, the central character of Hermetic Philosophy -- the system that Hegel bequeathed to Dialectical Marxism. Hermes was 'himself' based on the Egyptian god Thoth, who supposedly invented language and Philosophy (aka 'wisdom') -- and who, incidentally, we are told constituted the world out of language --, from whom the Greeks derived their word for 'God' (Theos -- and hence Theology), and we our word "theory".]"

- Rosa 'The Red' Lichtenstein, Anti-Dialectics; The Politics of Metaphysics

https://www.anti-dialectics.co.uk/Rest_ ... Twelve.htm

 
Gary Childress
Posts: 3096
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: The Domain of Confusion

Re: The Blame Game

Post by Gary Childress »

RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:11 am
simplicity wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 9:17 pm If you have studied economics to some degree, you might understand that capitalism, like most complex systems, ...
How can you write that with a straight face. If you've studied economics you know capitalism is not a political system (or any other kind of system) but a view of economic relationships, namely between produced value and reservinf wealth for future production, (i.e. not eating the seed grain).

There may be politcal ideologies that intend to promote capitalist views, but there is no capitalist political system. The most common political systems in most of the world today are some variations of democracy. Capitalism is incompatible with democracy, which is why there has never been a country where capitalism was freely practiced, not even in the United States.
Why do you say "Capitalism is incompatible with democracy"?
I know that anyone who believes there can be some system put in place that will produce the kind of society they believe one ought to be is pursuing an impossible ideal, and I know whatever one is going to have and enjoy in this life they must pursue and achieve by their own effort else be something less than fully human.
Is the idea that humans can exist successfully without any form of government an "impossible ideal" as well?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The Blame Game

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:37 pm Tell that to the tens of millions of innocent people slaughtered in WWll.
Just to provide a little perspective: The estimated total number of deaths attributed to World War II is 70–85 million. From 1900-1999, 174 million people were killed by the world's governments. That happens to be, "6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century."

Only governments go to war with each other, not individuals, and governments kill many more people than are killed in all wars.

As for the so-called, "innocence," of those killed in wars, every one who supports their government's war or participates in it is not innocent but complicit in all that war's horrors.
simplicity
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by simplicity »

Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:56 am Capitalism in its purist form is what people are against: the belief that there should not be a LIMIT to wealth gain while simultaneously that the poor should be exploited by their desperations.
This excess was made possible by a corporate structure legislated into being by corrupt politicians. Return corporations to their original intent and much this excess will disappear.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:56 amNote that the advantage of the invisible hand is only as good as we have means to assure that no monopolies exist. But the first thing that the capitalist would do is to defund any possible means for policing of them exclusively and USE the public policing as their OWN means to rule.
A functional check/balance system is critical in making any system accountable. Again, political and regulatory corruption is the problem here.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:56 am FACT: unless you could actually PROVE that all people can be equally successful under capitalism, it is irrelevant that SOME succeed well.
This is silly and hopelessly Utopian. Equality of outcome [for all kinds of reasons] is a pipe-dream.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:56 amEvolution does NOT 'favor' PROGRESS, it favors mere SURVIVAL, and where it is reasonable to note that capitalism is akin to Natural Evolution (economically), it too only favors the majority to suffer in order for the deluded profiteering minorities to think that EVERYONE 'wins'. SUCCESS for all is NOT NATURAL! The only way to go against this nature is to advance it using intellectual means to distribute the values of this 'free' Earth to all of us. It is NOT 'free' when you have some dicks DICTATING their superior religious right to own it all up.
We are a part of the natural world...nothing special.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:56 amI am not against being wealthy. I am against the FACT that GREED is the more NATURAL condition that assures ANYONE will 'addictively' be more abusive in conserving it. Most people, just like most animals SUFFER in Nature. Why should we NOT use our intellectual capacity to try to combat this tendency? That is, we can steer evolution to be less greedy. It is still 'natural' for us to do this even though it goes against the 'invisible hand' of nature apart from us to progress beyond our normal proclivities.
Human intelligence has a ways to go but we are what we are. And, it could be a lot worse, so instead of complaining so much, try to enjoy yourself and find the good that's out there.
simplicity
Posts: 679
Joined: Thu May 20, 2021 5:23 pm

Re: The Blame Game

Post by simplicity »

RCSaunders wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:27 pmAs for the so-called, "innocence," of those killed in wars, every one who supports their government's war or participates in it is not innocent but complicit in all that war's horrors.
So how do you go about not supporting your government? Are you completely off the grid?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The Blame Game

Post by RCSaunders »

simplicity wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 7:11 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:27 pmAs for the so-called, "innocence," of those killed in wars, every one who supports their government's war or participates in it is not innocent but complicit in all that war's horrors.
So how do you go about not supporting your government? Are you completely off the grid?
First of all there is no government that is, "my government." I am not responsible for anything that is forced on me against my will. When a thug takes my wallet at gunpoint, or a government takes over infrasctricture (leaving no choice of any other) I am not supporting the thug with my money and I am not supporting the government by using what is available (which the government does not produce any of but simply takes control of or confiscates from those who do produce those things, then takes credit for it).

If you support a political party, vote, are involved in politics in any way, or support any political candidates you are supporting the government. If you receive any aid, subsidies, or help of any kind from the government or use any so-called government services (like public education, unemployment, etc.), you are supporting the government. I don't do any of those things, and within what is practically possible, I evade all association with any government agency at any level, federal, state, or municipal and whatever relationship I have with any government agency or government employee is involuntary.

I don't, "fight," the government. I'm not an anarchist. Most people love government and would be terrified of living without one. I'm like H.L. Mencken who said, "I believe in only one thing, liberty, but I do not believe in it enough to want to force on anyone." I simply choose to live my own life as free as I possibly can because I could not bear living like those who subordinate their own life to some political, social, or ideological collective agenncy. But their governments will always end by making things worse for them, even killing them, but it's their choice. Unfortunately they are complicit in their own sufferihg.
Post Reply