Governments = Useless? Always?

[guerilla]

Anarchy isn't viable as long as there are other governments waiting to invade yo ass.

I'm not sure this follows.

Wanna bet? Shut down all publicly funded & subsidized services in LA for 72 hours. Law enforcement, fire department, ambulance, hospitals & public clinics, infrastructure for electric grid, sewer system, mass transit, highways, subsidized communication networks, and so on.

72 hours and LA would be a complete & total disaster. 6 weeks, it'd look pretty close to Somalia.

But that wouldn't be the case in Victoria. Or Wichita. Or Reykjavik.

In order to logically prove your point, you can't use only exceptions.

You guys railing on against government like this come off as a bunch of spoiled college kids, who completely take for granted everything society already has is place for you, as if all the "necessities" are just magically supposed to be there without any intervention.

Society as it is, is us. We are society. Whether there is a government or not, we create the rules, we create the culture and we create economic prosperity. Government is just an abstraction on top of a civil society.

I've been to probably over 30 countries, and have seen the contrast between big government, and almost no government at all.

So you would say a China or a USSR would be superior to a Switzerland or Monaco? Or East Germany was superior to West Germany?

Those are all big government examples.

And what's your big idea anyway? Get rid of your democratically elected government? Then what?

What is so great about democracy? Hitler was elected democratically. The Soviet Unions had elections all the time.

You'll end up with a corporate dictator, and if you speak out against him, you'll end up in a 4x2 cell with no trial.

There is a great essay by Etienne de la Boetie, called "The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude". Basically, government only exists by consent (deserved or not). That's why the Berlin Wall fell. That is why the USSR collapsed. When people stop believing in government, poof, it goes away.

And thus, some corporate dictator couldn't take control if he didn't have consent. In fact, corporations are created by government, so without them, there wouldn't even be corporate dictators like the blood thirsty Steve Jobs and the totalitarian Oprah Winfrey.

Dumbass...

If you're right in your argument, there is no need to be so hostile. Surely it can't be good for business that you're posting here with your business names on your profile and being very hostile at the same time.

You either don't value your firms, you don't value your relationships and/or you don't value your public record. Or you can say you don't value people at Wickedfire, but if that is true, then why post here at all?

 

[MSTeacher]

If there would be no people that believe the governments, there would be no governments lol. It is us - the people who, the government governs. If all together at once all the people of one government will "refuse" to be governed, what can the government do?

 

[guerilla]

Then go move to Zimbabwe if you're so against the "government".

This is known as the love it or leave it argument. Basically, government represents me as a citizen, but if I disagree with government, then I have to leave rather than the government change.

Which then begs the question, does the government work for me, or is the government autonomous from me? You seem to think it is the latter.

If the government is autonomous from me, it no longer represents me. So then the question is, who does it represent?

My dear friend erect mentioned in another thread that libertarianism is not anarchism, but he is very wrong. Taking the concept of individual liberty to its logical extension, means I am always sovereign, because the minute I am not, I cease to exist as a political actor. And a society of sovereign individuals operating peacefully is not governed. It is coordinated by voluntary (market) interactions.

I'd love to have a polite debate on this with you. I suspect we have some common ground. But you'll have to do more than be angry and hostile. You'll have to articulate positions and then defend them logically (against contradiction).

 

[jonas33h]

I am a staunch believer in smaller government is better but no government would be retarded.... look at the chaos that ensued at the super dome after Hurricane Katrina you need to have a governing body to punish negative and disruptive behavior.

 

[guerilla]

I am a staunch believer in smaller government is better but no government would be retarded.... look at the chaos that ensued at the super dome after Hurricane Katrina you need to have a governing body to punish negative and disruptive behavior.

The SuperDome was a government run operation during Katrina. If anything, that is an argument against government being able to handle emergencies. The Red Cross did a fantastic job, and that is a private agency.

 

[jonas33h]

people comitted crimes because there was no one to enforce the law (lack of government ) not only did this happen in the super dome but in new orleans in general.

when people feel as if the government isn't watching they will act on their own set of rules. That doesn't prove your idea of a government-less society being superior. And my argument was not on providing aide to people because I agree charitable works are definitely in better hands with private organizations but to enforce laws and positive behavior you must have government.

 

[lukep]

^People who act evil when no one is looking are going to be the first to starve to death if you take away welfare and everyone they try to go steal from is armed.

 

[JarredLv]

people comitted crimes because there was no one to enforce the law (lack of government ) not only did this happen in the super dome but in new orleans in general.

There was no "lack of government" during Katrina. It was there, just grossly ineffective. Now if the people of New Orleans were in a society where people were autonomous and mentally prepared to defend themselves things would have been quite different.

 

[jonas33h]

^ a militia is still some form of government.....
the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the members, citizens, or inhabitants of communities, societies, and states; direction of the affairs of a state, community, etc.; political administration: Government is necessary to the existence of civilized society.

 

[teck112]

lol @ the tag

 

[Moxie]

Wanna bet? Shut down all publicly funded & subsidized services in LA for 72 hours. Law enforcement, fire department, ambulance, hospitals & public clinics, infrastructure for electric grid, sewer system, mass transit, highways, subsidized communication networks, and so on.

72 hours and LA would be a complete & total disaster. 6 weeks, it'd look pretty close to Somalia.

The government version of LA has had years to develop. The fair comparison is whatever form LA would exist in now if it had evolved free of government.

There's no private fire department in LA because it can't compete with the "free" one. If all grocery stores were government run, then yes, it would also cause problems if they were shut down for 72 hours.

 

[jonas33h]

there is no free fire departments because the urgency to put a fire out for a poor person over a rich person would easily be decided by who has the larger wallet to pay for the service. a private company can't objectively put out fires or to not be tempted to pay a hobo to light someones house on fire...nah mean

 

[Moxie]

A glass company can pay a hobo to break windows. There are areas in the US served by private fire fighting companies, and also over half of firefighters are volunteers.

 

[jacky8]

LMAO how many of the arguing ones have actually punched someone even once? If a country was run by a private organization, it'd have to either be a dictatorship or a new structure we haven't yet seen. If you are fantasizing about the later, well, then you are just fantasizing. The argument of a private organization being better than government is not based upon any sound evidence.

You guys railing on against government like this come off as a bunch of spoiled college kids, who completely take for granted everything society already has is place for you, as if all the "necessities" are just magically supposed to be there without any intervention.

That is the problem. People take the goodness around them for granted.

 

[Moxie]

If a country was run by a private organization, it'd have to either be a dictatorship or a new structure we haven't yet seen. If you are fantasizing about the later, well, then you are just fantasizing. The argument of a private organization being better than government is not based upon any sound evidence.

Do you not consider dentists, Wonder Bread, Delta airlines, Taco Bell, plumbers, mechanics, and FedEx to be part of the country?

 

[jonas33h]

^ they are all seperate divisions of government, duh.

but for realz government is superior at restricting, but when it comes to setting budgets and spending and job creation and creating a better quality of life private sector is number.

That is also why we have the constitution that states what the government CAN NOT do. Because to be frank the government sucks at operating anything.

 

[jacky8]

Do you not consider dentists, Wonder Bread, Delta airlines, Taco Bell, plumbers, mechanics, and FedEx to be part of the country?

What I said is still valid. All of these provide a specific product or service. They are just vendors (or affiliates?), like you and me.

btw unless I read the whole fine blueprint of the model that you believe can do better than the government, I can't say more. Even when you describe in detail, if you miss a single important feature, you will make the model appear unappealing. I doubt such a proven model even exists. It'd eventually be a dictatorship if it does.

Consider the case of military. It is kind of similar to a private organization when it takes over a nation. The military chief has his say over everything. As per your idea, just because it is a kind of disciplined private organization, it should be better than a democratically elected government. Now look what they have done in Myanmar and Pakistan, only to name a couple.

 

[guerilla]

That is also why we have the constitution that states what the government CAN NOT do. Because to be frank the government sucks at operating anything.

Actually, the US Constitution states only what the federal government CAN do, and leaves the balance to the states.

What I said is still valid. All of these provide a specific product or service. They are just vendors (or affiliates?), like you and me.

Defense, law, arbitration, investigation, money, banking are all just specific products and services too.

 

[guerilla]

people comitted crimes because there was no one to enforce the law (lack of government ) not only did this happen in the super dome but in new orleans in general.

when people feel as if the government isn't watching they will act on their own set of rules.

I said this in another thread, but I will repeat it here. I live in a town of 15,000 people. I have seen one police car in 3 months, and our cop shop closes at 5:00 PM each day, and weekend and after hours police service has to be provided by the next city over.

No one where I live commits crimes because the police and government aren't around.

Maybe it has more to do with the culture of the people involved than with the amount of government. Maybe some people, in some circumstances are more likely to act responsibly without supervision.

I can't speak for you guys, but I don't intend to rob or rape anyone, government or not. Maybe you guys fear you would start raping people if there was no government around to stop you?

That doesn't prove your idea of a government-less society being superior.

I never claimed it did. I just said that point you were making actually worked against your argument, because the US government was in-charge of N.O. and the levees. To say that things devolved under government, and then say that it would be the same with an absence of government seems a bit disingenuous to me.

And my argument was not on providing aide to people because I agree charitable works are definitely in better hands with private organizations but to enforce laws and positive behavior you must have government.

Ok, you have asserted this, the question is, can you prove it?

Can you prove that we would all riot and pillage if there was no government around? If even 5% of us would not, then it means your assertion, cannot possibly be a fact.

And as far as the enforcement of laws, you don't need a government for that. Muslims enforce Sharia law, which is market law. It has nothing to do with government. In fact, merchant law (commercial law) is completely from the market.

Common law also originated among the people, not the government.

You could argue that government CAN enforce the law, but any of us could enforce the law. It's not some holy or divine doctrine. You don't need superpowers to catch a robber, or to get him to make restitution.

 

[lukep]

there is no free fire departments because the urgency to put a fire out for a poor person over a rich person would easily be decided by who has the larger wallet to pay for the service.

WOW did you just out yourself as an Anti-Capitalist!

Dude, the criterion of who has the biggest wallet, or at least who can afford to pay, is EXACTLY what should decide who gets fire-fighting and frankly ALL other service.

That's called FAIRNESS.

If you think it's fair for freeloaders to enjoy the same benefits that I have to pay for then you're seriously part of the problem. (And yes, paying taxes is paying for firefighting service here in the socialist USA.)

a private company can't objectively put out fires or to not be tempted to pay a hobo to light someones house on fire...

I guess if that firehouse had no competition then it *could* happen... Luckily a FREE MARKET would give that firehouse competitors and they wouldn't have time to go around lighting fires... They'd have to be hustling to compete!

Your mind keeps outing you as someone who lives deep inside socialism.


@jacky8: Another way of looking at our "spoiled" attitude is that perhaps you just can't see how much you're being ROBBED of... but we can.

Things like Liberty and Freedom.

You only THINK you have them.

But you don't.

We see through that brainwashing.