Political Philosophy

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Johnny' timestamp='1283788629' post='2168798']
What if I don't vote?
[/quote]

If you didn't vote, it's not consensual. It's robbery. Kind of like sex. If you don't give your consent, it's called "rape."

[quote]
Or what if I vote for the guy trying to lower my taxes?[/quote]

If you vote for the guy trying to lower your taxes, you are still giving your personal support to the idea that 51% of a population has the right to tell the other 49% what they must do. At gunpoint.

~Sternhauser

Edited September 6, 2010 by Sternhauser

[Winchester]

If two people agree to use land for a purpose, but then a new person comes along, everything has to be redone because otherwise, it's aggression.

[Socrates]

Not voting will solve all our problems.


[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1283789078' post='2168804']
Kind of like sex. If you don't give your consent, it's called "rape."
[/quote]
Dirty mind.

[Laudate_Dominum]

where's teh lolwut pear win u need it?

[Johnny]

Not voting is not the answer. Not voting is just going to allow the millions of other people who vote to screw it up. I'm not saying that anyone with an (R) next to their name is the answer, but we need to find the best candidates out there and put them in office. It's a pipe dream I know, but no more so than Anarchy.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1283879709' post='2169211']
Dirty mind.
[/quote]

Pardon me? What was dirty about my comparison?

~Sternhauser

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Johnny' timestamp='1283910725' post='2169504']
Not voting is not the answer. Not voting is just going to allow the millions of other people who vote to screw it up. I'm not saying that anyone with an ® next to their name is the answer, but we need to find the best candidates out there and put them in office. It's a pipe dream I know, but no more so than Anarchy.
[/quote]

No, deliberately concentrating the violent power of the majority of individuals in a society into the hands of a few individuals is worse than a pipe dream: it has proven and deadly results. It is not theoretically sound, therefore it is practically unsound. Anarchy is already extant wherever individuals cooperate voluntarily, without forcing others to surrender their rights or their property at gunpoint.

You don't keep water clean by pouring a pollutant into it, yet less pollutant than is usual. You keep water clean by [i]not[/i] pouring [i]any[/i] pollutant into it. Don't pour aggressive violence into a society. Any amount.

~Sternhauser

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1283872718' post='2169165']
If two people agree to use land for a purpose, but then a new person comes along, everything has to be redone because otherwise, it's aggression.
[/quote]

And Catholics do good works because they think they can earn their way into heaven on their own merits. Winchester, please be intellectually honest. It really is getting old.

~Sternhauser

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='Johnny' timestamp='1283910725' post='2169504']
I'm not saying that anyone with an ® next to their name is the answer, but we need to find the best candidates out there and put them in office. It's a pipe dream I know, but no more so than Anarchy.
[/quote]

So, wait you are able to find candidates out there? Wow, didn't know they were out there, besides being the best candidates as well.

Every system has an ideal, though for some of us with either more perspective or experience we know what system would work better at least to our logic.

[Sternhauser]

Socrates,

I'm still waiting for a response to my question. If not a defense of your original accusation, then an apology. Step up.

~Sternhauser

[dairygirl4u2c]

soc's main approach is to avoid those sorts of things. im not sure if it's 'cognitive dissonance', or a matter of personal pride, or a matter of pride to other people. my guess is that it's a matter of others' persception of him mostly, and at least a little, sometimes a whole lot, of cognitive dissonance.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1283872718' post='2169165']
If two people agree to use land for a purpose, but then a new person comes along, everything has to be redone because otherwise, it's aggression.
[/quote]

sounds a whole lot more like a liberal talking. the new person has a 'right' to the stuff. and, if we're going to stop him from his right to access, to do what it takes.... then you're through aggression saying 'no'. at gun point.

the best solution is for society to realize that we need to compensate him for his nonaccess, at least with bootstraps, and a minimum.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1284064443' post='2170990']
Socrates,

I'm still waiting for a response to my question. If not a defense of your original accusation, then an apology. Step up.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
I was just razzing you with the "dirty mind" remark, which was not intended to be taken seriously by anybody.

I guess the joke was kind of lame. If it really causes offense, feel free to ask the mods to delete it. I honestly won't care a bit.

[dentarthurdent95]

I think the two party system is the one of the worst ideas this country has ever had, other that the stock market. However, since I am about three years away from being able to vote, it doesn't really mater what my political views are for now. I do know that I will register Independent. I believe in conservative values and know that there is a difference between being conservative and being republican. I feel as though people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have done more damage to the Republican party that people who bash it like Jon Stewart, of who I am surprisingly a fan.

[Micah]

Absolutist/monarchist. What now..