Libertarian vs. State...AIRCRAFT CARRIER!

Response to Vogter and Sarahon. Sarahon believes in Libertarianism, Vogter the State, my position is; Aircraft Carrier!

I like the idea of a Libertarian society but see no short term solution for having one in my life time. Every successful model I think of that doesn't open the doorway to societal abuse takes at least 50-100 years. I'm not a big fan of Hobbes but lets face it, you can't discount his work entirely.

And yes, I start off with another damned political rant. Sue me. It was hot and when it is hot I tend to ramble.

Oh, if you do sue me, I will respond with my new Aircraft Carrier. The only thing I need to worry about is Moonlitknight81's Submarine but I'm sure we can come to some mutually beneficial arrangement.

Then you will be facing an Aircraft Carrier AND a Submarine!
Hah!
Now I've got you worried, eh?
Didn't think of THAT!

Vogter2100
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vogter2100

Sarahon06
http://www.youtube.com/user/Sarahon06

Subscribe to Moonlitknight81 or he will torpedo you when you least expect it.
Moonlitknight81
http://www.youtube.com/user/MoonlitKnight81

Chunky Monkey
http://www.youtube.com/user/nephilimfree?blend=1&ob=4

Category:

Education

Tags:

• thetruepooka
• sarahon06
• vogter2100
• moonlitknight81
• libertarian
• statist
• politics
• philosophy
• God
• Christian
• Atheist
• burn
• at
• the
• stake
• theyoungturks
• media
• news
• aircraft
• carrier
• power

[JackofOneTrade567]

How can anybody propose that a monopoly is the solution to something? Govt is the monopoly of coercion, law enforcement, regulation, etc. How can anyone prefer this over having choice? No I don't care if the US is a world power, since frankly we can't handle being number one, but under a more capitalist society, we can still be prosperous and productive, minus the large superfluous military. We have to stop giving people power over us just because they're charming, and embrace choice and freedom

[TheTruePooka]

@JackofOneTrade567 While I do agree with your sentiment as I look at America I see little difference between capitalism and government. Our government is entirely funded and driven by capitalism. The wealthiest men in this country bribed the supreme court & our government recently to ensure this is so.

Unless you can find a way to do Separation of Capitalism & Government I suspect that will be the inevitable result.

[JackofOneTrade567]

@TheTruePooka "Our government is entirely funded and driven by capitalism."

What does that mean? We live in a mixed economy. Why does half our economic system get blamed? Regardless of whether you used the term capitalism, socialism, or mixed it would still sound vague and confusing.

You mean the govt is bought by political capitalists? But then the fact remains that the more govt colludes and interferes with the economy, the farther away you get from capitalism.

[TheTruePooka]

@JackofOneTrade567 You sound like you're doing Capitalism apologetics. To speak to some people you'd think that no bad or evil ever comes from capitalism.

Government is a system that sets down a social contract for people to live by.

Capitalism is a system where the ultimate goal is greater profit.

Now which system do you think lends itself better to the opportunity for seeking a moral, enlightened society? Capitalism is amoral. Government is moral or immoral.

cont...

[TheTruePooka]

@TheTruePooka Left unchecked without some form of morality capitalism will always seek to acquire all at any cost.

It is only the morality from other systems (social systems we create like religion, government, etc) that keep capitalism in check. Or act as it's bitch, as our government in America does. As does the majority religion.

Unless people recognize this America is absolutely doomed.

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 And you would get rid of pollution by making all property private? That doesn't seem like it would be very effective.

No baseless paranoia needed... It is all rather firmly grounded in what has happened in the past.

And yes it would happen... indeed it is more likely to happen... as you point out it is very profitable for defense contractors, and they are very wealthy... so using wars to further their net profit gain would be much in line with your utopia.

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 They might not be armies at first... but their evolution from private protection agencies to private armies is a rather obvious direction for them to go in (not all, but it would only take a few to get the ball rolling in that direction).

Racketeering becomes exceptionally profitable if there is nobody around to stop those practicing it...

It isn't like this is stuff that has never happened... it is rather firmly grounded in history.

[JackofOneTrade567]

@stonetop Protection agencies aren't armies, nor would they benefit from war since they would most likely be selling their services to neighboring communities.

Companies don't engage in racketeering unless it's the govt doing the racketeering. It would hurt their profits otherwise.

If you look into it more, you'll see that govt is the root of all corruption. Anyways, I think I'm done. This is tiring.

[JackofOneTrade567]

@stonetop Why would anyone do that? Pollution only occurs on public property, not private.

No, the system I propose would definitely deal with the flaws much better than any govt could. You're just arguing from baseless paranoia.

You had and have no say in the wars that occurred. War isn't profitable for the majority of people, but it is for the state and the private dfense contractors they hire. It's far less likely that war would happen in a completely capitalist society.

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 Darn those regulations! If I want to dump 500 gallons of chlorine down my driveway I should be allowed to do so.

And yes the system has deep flaws... but what you are proposing doesn't get rid of those flaws it enshrines them.

I have as much say in the finding of those wars as anyone else... one vote... which is how it should be... not "richest picks"

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 With the money that they are using to pay for their private police force, and to the end of enforcing their own legal code (burka time).

Its pretty odd that you'd suggest that people use their own funds to pay for private armies to enforce the law... then ask "what money" people would use when paying for their private army.

Religion is just one example... there are also private armies employed by companies to enforce their profits (Pinkerton anyone?)

[JackofOneTrade567]

@stonetop No you don't. There are countless success barriers, in the form of regulations and govt departments. You think these departments only effect those at the top? As for choosing your laws, you barely have that much freedom. The govt is still warring on drugs, sex workers, etc. Any progress made takes years, if not decades. Again, it's a monopoly that barely resembles democracy.

Did you choose to fund the wars? No, so no you don't have control over where your money goes.

[JackofOneTrade567]

@stonetop Stock up fire power with what money and to what end? What would they gain? That's just paranoia talking. Conflict has more to do with resources anyway.

And you're pretty much just describing govt and the way it expands, except you added religion as a main motivator.

If you're gonna act like a paranoid anti-theist, then i might as well not continue this conversation. Religion =/= violent, and I'm an atheist.

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 how is that different from what we already, in theory, have? We can chose our laws, where our money goes, and have the freedom to succeed/experiment/innovate.

[stonetop]

@JackofOneTrade567 And yes, the community would be surrounded by dissidents... all the more reason for them to stockpile as much firepower as possible so that they can enforce their own rules... and then convert the heathens.

That's pretty much the story of human history.