You keep walking by the argument without even saying hello. A simple question; grant me, as a personal favor, the point that the valid response to an unnacountable government is armed rebellion. So say you and I go form a militia. Right-thinking americans (who are, of course, in the majority) raly to our cause. The washington kleptocracy is o'erthrown. A new constitutional convention is held.
Now, do you seriously believe that this convention results in the _absence_ of a federal government?
Here's a better question. The last five years have seen corporate malfeasance undreamt of since the era of the trusts. Why aren't you calling for the abolition of the corporation as a legal entity?
the federal reserve
Yeah, let's have a puny central bank, like russia. They're doing real well without inflation controls.
Amtrak sucks
Did you miss my caveat about good management, or just ignore it?
private enterprise can reach space cheaply
Yeah, maybe corporations will do space travel as well as they do air travel. Air travel looked pretty cheap, too - until all those bankruptcies.
Besides, I thought the point of space travel was to learn something, not to save money?If the corps do research, do you think they'll opensource the results? That'll be the day.
I'm not gonna touch the constitutional arguments, like I said, they miss the point. The crucial difference between our points of view is that while we both think that a single entity is responsible or the world being a tiolet (you - the government, me - corporations) you call for abolition while I call for reform.
I live in New Jersey. I have ample bitter experience in the sad truth that the federal gvernment is no more or less corruptible than local governments. Unfortunately, deep differences between large human group interaction systems and, say, softare render them immune to any kind of cost-benefit analysis. The fact of the matter is this. Local governments do some things well. Federal governmens do other things well. Both perform necessary functions. The fact that our government performs most of these functions in an incredibly shoddy manner is evidence of our poor choice of leaders, not of the federal government's inherent inability to perform these functons.
Now, as to your points
Really? What examples do you have exactly?
Let's see. The interstate highway system, the TVA, the Air Traffic Control system, the Federal Reserve, and (assuming, as I mentioned, decent management, which we are unlikely to see anytime soon) the railway system and space research. I could go on. As I mentioned, the above examples perform more or less well proportinally to the intelligence of management.
Sure, you can claim that the federal government is fulfilling these functions crappily. But, as was mentioned earlier in the debate, unless you want to appeal to religious considerations I see no way for you to argue that Washington _should not_ fulfil these functions.
I cite the fact that there were roughly 20 slave holding societies which made slavery illegal without resorting to violence, vs the ONE that did.
This is an interesting argument, and quite new to me. I will have to read the book.
When was the last time the federal government had to "answer" for anything?
We have these group events every four years or so, they're called elections.
I hate to be rude, but I'm afraid that this is the piece of libertarian dogma I find most repugnant. I was born in Russia. I know what a _real_ unaccountable central authority looks like. Please get a clue.
Really? Who are we to appeal to when the national government is unjust?
The gun. You appeal to the gun.
Two hundred and twenty nine years ago this country was founded on a simple principle; if the entity with the monopoly on violence in society abuses its power, the monopoly is null and void.
A shame, really. We were _this_ close to a revolutionary politic during the sixties, and here we are a generation later with our thumbs up our asses, going "gee, what should we do when we're oppressed by our government? aduhhhh"
Slashdot Mirror
You keep walking by the argument without even saying hello. A simple question; grant me, as a personal favor, the point that the valid response to an unnacountable government is armed rebellion. So say you and I go form a militia. Right-thinking americans (who are, of course, in the majority) raly to our cause. The washington kleptocracy is o'erthrown. A new constitutional convention is held.
Now, do you seriously believe that this convention results in the _absence_ of a federal government?
Here's a better question. The last five years have seen corporate malfeasance undreamt of since the era of the trusts. Why aren't you calling for the abolition of the corporation as a legal entity?
the federal reserve
Yeah, let's have a puny central bank, like russia. They're doing real well without inflation controls.
Amtrak sucks
Did you miss my caveat about good management, or just ignore it?
private enterprise can reach space cheaply
Yeah, maybe corporations will do space travel as well as they do air travel. Air travel looked pretty cheap, too - until all those bankruptcies.
Besides, I thought the point of space travel was to learn something, not to save money?If the corps do research, do you think they'll opensource the results? That'll be the day.
I'm not gonna touch the constitutional arguments, like I said, they miss the point. The crucial difference between our points of view is that while we both think that a single entity is responsible or the world being a tiolet (you - the government, me - corporations) you call for abolition while I call for reform.
You know what this reminds me of?
The Mac Vs. PC "debate"
or the Windows vs. Linux "debate"
whichever comes first.
I live in New Jersey. I have ample bitter experience in the sad truth that the federal gvernment is no more or less corruptible than local governments. Unfortunately, deep differences between large human group interaction systems and, say, softare render them immune to any kind of cost-benefit analysis. The fact of the matter is this. Local governments do some things well. Federal governmens do other things well. Both perform necessary functions. The fact that our government performs most of these functions in an incredibly shoddy manner is evidence of our poor choice of leaders, not of the federal government's inherent inability to perform these functons.
Now, as to your points
Really? What examples do you have exactly?
Let's see. The interstate highway system, the TVA, the Air Traffic Control system, the Federal Reserve, and (assuming, as I mentioned, decent management, which we are unlikely to see anytime soon) the railway system and space research. I could go on. As I mentioned, the above examples perform more or less well proportinally to the intelligence of management.
Sure, you can claim that the federal government is fulfilling these functions crappily. But, as was mentioned earlier in the debate, unless you want to appeal to religious considerations I see no way for you to argue that Washington _should not_ fulfil these functions.
I cite the fact that there were roughly 20 slave holding societies which made slavery illegal without resorting to violence, vs the ONE that did.
This is an interesting argument, and quite new to me. I will have to read the book.
When was the last time the federal government had to "answer" for anything?
We have these group events every four years or so, they're called elections.
I hate to be rude, but I'm afraid that this is the piece of libertarian dogma I find most repugnant. I was born in Russia. I know what a _real_ unaccountable central authority looks like. Please get a clue.
Really? Who are we to appeal to when the national government is unjust?
The gun. You appeal to the gun.
Two hundred and twenty nine years ago this country was founded on a simple principle; if the entity with the monopoly on violence in society abuses its power, the monopoly is null and void.
A shame, really. We were _this_ close to a revolutionary politic during the sixties, and here we are a generation later with our thumbs up our asses, going "gee, what should we do when we're oppressed by our government? aduhhhh"