Somalia Libertarian Paradise

[havok579257]

I believe you think you are responding to what I've said.

 

 

am I wrong in understanding that your form of government is that is the individual persons responsibility to seek justice from their attacker/rapist and no one should be forced to help them.  So for the single female who is gang raped, well if she can't bring her attackers to justice, well that just stinks to be her? 

[havok579257]

Actually this is not even remotely near what people like Winchester and I advocate.

 

 

Do you advocate that society should not be forced to bring criminals to justice and that if a single female can not bring her rapists to justice, well stinks for her?  Am I wrong in understanding this?

[CatholicsAreKewl]

This is the problem I have with this theory of government.  It wants help and use of services from society but does not want to help at all.  Its all take and no give.

 

I thought this was what people said about Liberals. This arguments untrue regardless of what side you apply it to. Liberals, Conservatives, and Libertarians want a system based on their moral values. Libertarians just happen to see freedom as a more important value. A lot of Libertarian arguments are based on the belief that people are able to fend for themselves without a motherlike governing body telling them what to do. You would make a stronger case if you pushed the point that such a system isn't feasible or that it wouldn't work for our population. 

Edited August 16, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[havok579257]

I thought this was what people said about Liberals. This arguments untrue regardless of what side you apply it to. Liberals, Conservatives, and Libertarians want a system based on their moral values. Libertarians just happen to see freedom as a more important value. A lot of Libertarian arguments are based on their belief that people are able to fend for themselves without a motherlike governing body telling them what to do. You would make a stronger case if you pushed the point that such a system isn't feasible for whatever reason. 

 

 

but libertarians also want no help for their fellow man being forced on them.  so if they choose not to help their fellow man then so be it even if that means this person would die without help(disable, mentally disabled).  they want a society where its all about them it seems and their wants.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

but libertarians also want no help for their fellow man being forced on them.  so if they choose not to help their fellow man then so be it even if that means this person would die without help(disable, mentally disabled).  they want a society where its all about them it seems and their wants.

 

This is a misconception. I've heard libertarians argue that the overwhelming majority of people are good and that people will help the poor regardless of whether the government forces them to or not.  There's something to the notion that the joy of giving is sucked away when it's done at gunpoint. Also, a lot of fed funded institutions aren't very efficient. The government is known to be pretty careless with how it spends its money. 

 

PERSONAL EXAMPLE: 

 

I volunteered as an ESL instructor for refugees at a company that was mainly government funded. The feds paid students for attending the courses and paid the company based on how many students attended. I soon realized that the system was such that both the students and the teachers were less interested in learning/teaching and more interested in getting money from the government (I wasn't even trained). 

Edited August 17, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Nihil Obstat]

Do you advocate that society should not be forced to bring criminals to justice and that if a single female can not bring her rapists to justice, well stinks for her?  Am I wrong in understanding this?

Who is society? How do I force "society" to do something?

[Winchester]

am I wrong in understanding that your form of government is that is the individual persons responsibility to seek justice from their attacker/rapist and no one should be forced to help them.  So for the single female who is gang raped, well if she can't bring her attackers to justice, well that just stinks to be her? 

I'll answer your question as soon as you correct your tone. You're attributing an attitude to me that I have not presented. 

[havok579257]

I'll answer your question as soon as you correct your tone. You're attributing an attitude to me that I have not presented. 

 

 

Then show me where I am wrong.  I honestly thought that is what your saying.  If I am mistaken, please correct my mistakes then.

[havok579257]

Who is society? How do I force "society" to do something?

 

 

if your going to get hung up on semantics then I will just avoid you and just talk to Winchester.  I am not wasting time explaining something that you already understand.

[Nihil Obstat]

if your going to get hung up on semantics then I will just avoid you and just talk to Winchester.  I am not wasting time explaining something that you already understand.

It is not the semantics that are important. It is the indication that your framing is so ludicrously skewed that we are not currently able to have an intelligent conversation.

[Winchester]

Then show me where I am wrong.  I honestly thought that is what your saying.  If I am mistaken, please correct my mistakes then.

Rephrase the question you asked before, but without the language impugning my character. Perhaps rereading what I've said will help you understand. My answer will merely be a rephrasing of what I've already said, anyway.

[havok579257]

It is not the semantics that are important. It is the indication that your framing is so ludicrously skewed that we are not currently able to have an intelligent conversation.

 

 

whatever, keep trying to come off as the smartest person in the room.  Conversation with you is over.  I am not wasting time dealing with you.

[Nihil Obstat]

whatever, keep trying to come off as the smartest person in the room.  Conversation with you is over.  I am not wasting time dealing with you.

Winchester is at least as smart as I am.

 

 

I will be here when you want to address something substantive.

[havok579257]

Rephrase the question you asked before, but without the language impugning my character. Perhaps rereading what I've said will help you understand. My answer will merely be a rephrasing of what I've already said, anyway.

 

 

well I am sorry you took the term "you" personally.  Not my intention and its my fault it came off that way due to the way I wrote it.  I was merely referring to "you" as a hypothetical person who wants this type of government not you personally.

 

Ok then let's try this:

 

1. Do you support a form of law that says no person should be forced to help others even if it means rapists and murders get to roam free and continue to commit murders and rapes?

 

2. Do you support a form of government that says that if no one wants to help the rape victim bring her attacker to justice then they should not be forced to help and she is just out of luck and if it happens to her again, its not anyone elses problem but hers?

 

3. Do you support a form of incarceration for violent offenders?  If not what is the anarchist answer to violent offenders roaming the world?

 

4. Do you support a form of government that makes it so no one has an communal responsibility?  Responsibility to the community for the common good?  Or do you believe a person has no responsibility to his common man and should not have to help them if he does not want to either through monetary means or whatever?

 

5. Do you believe a person is allowed to use things such as roads, hospitals and other public things but should have no responsibility to pay for them/responsibility for funding them?

 

6. Do you believe in a form of government that says that no one is obligated to help another person, even if it means this other person will die(example: children who's parents die when they are really young or mentally or physically disabled people who can not fend for themselves)?

 

7. Do you believe in a form of government which is essentially lawless?  Meaning there is no formal government and everyone is free to make up their own rules and punishments however the individual person deems fit?  Like maybe one man thinks if you steal a dollar from him you deserve death while another deems death only for murder.

 

 

Just so we are clear, this is not shoe horning you into something or trying to make you look bad or trying to say your wrong and I am right.  This is an honest attempt to understand this form of law you support and say would work and be possibly better than the one we have now.  So hopefully I will get honest answers to my questions so I can understand what your saying and not just the usual mocking and snark because I am honestly interested in understanding this.

[Winchester]

well I am sorry you took the term "you" personally.  Not my intention and its my fault it came off that way due to the way I wrote it.  I was merely referring to "you" as a hypothetical person who wants this type of government not you personally.

 

Ok then let's try this:

 

1. Do you support a form of law that says no person should be forced to help others even if it means rapists and murders get to roam free and continue to commit murders and rapes?

 

2. Do you support a form of government that says that if no one wants to help the rape victim bring her attacker to justice then they should not be forced to help and she is just out of luck and if it happens to her again, its not anyone elses problem but hers?

 

3. Do you support a form of incarceration for violent offenders?  If not what is the anarchist answer to violent offenders roaming the world?

 

4. Do you support a form of government that makes it so no one has an communal responsibility?  Responsibility to the community for the common good?  Or do you believe a person has no responsibility to his common man and should not have to help them if he does not want to either through monetary means or whatever?

 

5. Do you believe a person is allowed to use things such as roads, hospitals and other public things but should have no responsibility to pay for them/responsibility for funding them?

 

6. Do you believe in a form of government that says that no one is obligated to help another person, even if it means this other person will die(example: children who's parents die when they are really young or mentally or physically disabled people who can not fend for themselves)?

 

7. Do you believe in a form of government which is essentially lawless?  Meaning there is no formal government and everyone is free to make up their own rules and punishments however the individual person deems fit?  Like maybe one man thinks if you steal a dollar from him you deserve death while another deems death only for murder.

 

 

Just so we are clear, this is not shoe horning you into something or trying to make you look bad or trying to say your wrong and I am right.  This is an honest attempt to understand this form of law you support and say would work and be possibly better than the one we have now.  So hopefully I will get honest answers to my questions so I can understand what your saying and not just the usual mocking and snark because I am honestly interested in understanding this.

Fair enough. Seven questions, though? Holy crap!

 

I'll have to think.