Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Government does not equal society
Topic Started: Apr 6 2016, 10:02 PM (1,969 Views)
estonianman
Member Avatar

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Posted Image
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..

I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?

You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?
Edited by Tsalagi, Apr 6 2016, 10:37 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:02 PM
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
The problem with the Austrian School is they are so sure of themselves they fail to understand anyone else.

I'm a Socialist (Democratic Socialist) and I know more than a few Socialists. We have no problem differentiating between government and society. We have no idea what a "state religion" is. What we object to is that when an Austrian talks about a "private" solution they are using code to mean "for the wealthy". The Libertarian view of every man for themselves is not really about "every man" but "the rich" and everyone else is disposable.

What we do understand is government is part of the Society but so is religion and economics. They are subsets of "Society" and they interact with each other but none are the whole of Society and while they interact with each other they are also distinct from each other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 10:35 PM




Quote:
 
So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..


Why deal with any of it? Micromanagement by the state exasperated most of these problems, they didn't "deal with them"

Quote:
 
I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?


Then you don't know what the feck you are talking about. It isn't theory - the more free the society, the more prosperous it is. Reference the debate where atta got smashed on economic freedoms correlated to wealth.

Quote:
 
You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?


Again - why would I should I provide a solution to a state sanctioned problem?
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Apr 6 2016, 10:57 PM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:02 PM
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
The problem with the Austrian School is they are so sure of themselves they fail to understand anyone else.

I'm a Socialist (Democratic Socialist) and I know more than a few Socialists. We have no problem differentiating between government and society. We have no idea what a "state religion" is. What we object to is that when an Austrian talks about a "private" solution they are using code to mean "for the wealthy". The Libertarian view of every man for themselves is not really about "every man" but "the rich" and everyone else is disposable.

What we do understand is government is part of the Society but so is religion and economics. They are subsets of "Society" and they interact with each other but none are the whole of Society and while they interact with each other they are also distinct from each other.
This is a good response - but what you omit is that your template requires a level of contractual slavery, in that society owns the individual. Its interesting that you bring Austrian economic theory into this - why?

I understand that you are trying to achieve a balance - but history shows that when individuals are free they are more productive.

We are not ants.

Edited by estonianman, Apr 6 2016, 11:00 PM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:57 PM
Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 10:35 PM




Quote:
 
So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..


Why deal with any of it? Micromanagement by the state exasperated most of these problems, they didn't "deal with them"

Quote:
 
I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?


Then you don't know what the feck you are talking about. It isn't theory - the more free the society, the more prosperous it is. Reference the debate where atta got smashed on economic freedoms correlated to wealth.

Quote:
 
You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?


Again - why would I should I provide a solution to a state sanctioned problem?
You keep talking bout a free society, but if in that society, they have slavery, you're indicating that your society should not have done anything to to it? Ok, so your ideal society would never have dealt with slavery, never have dealt with Jim Crow. Sure as hell does sound like "every man for himself"
Edited by Tsalagi, Apr 6 2016, 11:09 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

Just trying to nail down specifically how your system deals with these problems.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 11:09 PM
Just trying to nail down specifically how your system deals with these problems.
The answer is, it doesn't. Libertarians don't care what men do to each other, just so long as there isn't a government involved.

It's hard to get them to admit that, however.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:59 PM
BuckFan
Apr 6 2016, 10:57 PM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:02 PM
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
The problem with the Austrian School is they are so sure of themselves they fail to understand anyone else.

I'm a Socialist (Democratic Socialist) and I know more than a few Socialists. We have no problem differentiating between government and society. We have no idea what a "state religion" is. What we object to is that when an Austrian talks about a "private" solution they are using code to mean "for the wealthy". The Libertarian view of every man for themselves is not really about "every man" but "the rich" and everyone else is disposable.

What we do understand is government is part of the Society but so is religion and economics. They are subsets of "Society" and they interact with each other but none are the whole of Society and while they interact with each other they are also distinct from each other.
This is a good response - but what you omit is that your template requires a level of contractual slavery, in that society owns the individual. Its interesting that you bring Austrian economic theory into this - why?

I understand that you are trying to achieve a balance - but history shows that when individuals are free they are more productive.

We are not ants.

If you ask why I brought the Austrians into this then you don't know who Frédéric Bastiat is.

The individual is no more "free" your society. The less successful are subject to the whim of the few because in your "free" society individuals will work to corner power and wealth. History has born this fact out. You cannot believe that the serf, the slave or the worker in the company town are actually more free.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 11:09 PM
Just trying to nail down specifically how your system deals with these problems.
By not supporting an institution that causes these problems?
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Opinionated
Apr 6 2016, 11:14 PM
Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 11:09 PM
Just trying to nail down specifically how your system deals with these problems.
The answer is, it doesn't. Libertarians don't care what men do to each other, just so long as there isn't a government involved.

It's hard to get them to admit that, however.
Not true. Although I expected that desperate strawman from you.
Edited by estonianman, Apr 6 2016, 11:57 PM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Apr 6 2016, 11:28 PM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:59 PM
BuckFan
Apr 6 2016, 10:57 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
This is a good response - but what you omit is that your template requires a level of contractual slavery, in that society owns the individual. Its interesting that you bring Austrian economic theory into this - why?

I understand that you are trying to achieve a balance - but history shows that when individuals are free they are more productive.

We are not ants.

If you ask why I brought the Austrians into this then you don't know who Frédéric Bastiat is.

The individual is no more "free" your society. The less successful are subject to the whim of the few because in your "free" society individuals will work to corner power and wealth. History has born this fact out. You cannot believe that the serf, the slave or the worker in the company town are actually more free.
I understand - I am not sure why you brought economics into the discussion.

Historically government has been the majority slavemaster, both directly and by taxation. That is a fact.
Edited by estonianman, Apr 6 2016, 11:56 PM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 10:35 PM
So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..

I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?

You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?
What is your response to closing the department of education, that I am against providing education?
Edited by estonianman, Apr 6 2016, 11:59 PM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 11:56 PM
BuckFan
Apr 6 2016, 11:28 PM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 10:59 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
If you ask why I brought the Austrians into this then you don't know who Frédéric Bastiat is.

The individual is no more "free" your society. The less successful are subject to the whim of the few because in your "free" society individuals will work to corner power and wealth. History has born this fact out. You cannot believe that the serf, the slave or the worker in the company town are actually more free.
I understand - I am not sure why you brought economics into the discussion.

Historically government has been the majority slavemaster, both directly and by taxation. That is a fact.
The OP brought up economics by attacking socialism which is an economic system and then convoluted it with government which is political.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 11:58 PM
Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 10:35 PM
So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..

I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?

You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?
What is your response to closing the department of education, that I am against providing education?
Not at all. I cannot comment on you desire to close the Department of Education unless I know what you plan instead. Do you support the Libertarian position of no public education or just local and state public education. I would have a different response to either case.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

BuckFan
Apr 7 2016, 12:05 AM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 11:58 PM
Tsalagi
Apr 6 2016, 10:35 PM
So tell me this....how in your society would you have dealt with the Native Americans if we had told you, no we don't want to sell you our land...how would a society built on your principles have dealt with slavery, Jim Crow?...Organized crime?..

I hear a lot from you Esto on stuff best reserved for a college poli-sci course, but nothing really concrete on how your philosophy would actually work in the real world?

You say you're not for state-sponsored equality, so what would have made things equal for we minorities in your society unless someone forced the Southern States to remove Jim Crow?
What is your response to closing the department of education, that I am against providing education?
Not at all. I cannot comment on you desire to close the Department of Education unless I know what you plan instead. Do you support the Libertarian position of no public education or just local and state public education. I would have a different response to either case.
No federally regulated public education. States can do what they want only because I am free to immigrate between them, beyond that I think education should be 100% privatized.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 7 2016, 12:20 AM
BuckFan
Apr 7 2016, 12:05 AM
estonianman
Apr 6 2016, 11:58 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Not at all. I cannot comment on you desire to close the Department of Education unless I know what you plan instead. Do you support the Libertarian position of no public education or just local and state public education. I would have a different response to either case.
No federally regulated public education. States can do what they want only because I am free to immigrate between them, beyond that I think education should be 100% privatized.
So education should only be for those who can afford it? The rest are condemned to a life of poverty because that is what no education provides.

You can move out of the country. It may not be as easily geographically as leaving a state but then it is unlikely that you will find a state that provides your utopia. I am surprised you will accept government at the state level but not at the federal level since, after all, it is still government.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
So education should only be for those who can afford it? The rest are condemned to a life of poverty because that is what no education provides.


This is false. The market has made necessities like food in such abundance that anyone can afford it. In fact since education has become a government priority, it has become unaffordable.

Quote:
 
You can move out of the country. It may not be as easily geographically as leaving a state but then it is unlikely that you will find a state that provides your utopia. I am surprised you will accept government at the state level but not at the federal level since, after all, it is still government.


Choices.
Edited by estonianman, Apr 7 2016, 12:57 AM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

estonianman
Apr 7 2016, 12:56 AM
Quote:
 
So education should only be for those who can afford it? The rest are condemned to a life of poverty because that is what no education provides.


This is false. The market has made necessities like food in such abundance that anyone can afford it. In fact since education has become a government priority, it has become unaffordable.

Quote:
 
You can move out of the country. It may not be as easily geographically as leaving a state but then it is unlikely that you will find a state that provides your utopia. I am surprised you will accept government at the state level but not at the federal level since, after all, it is still government.


Choices.
What world do you live in. Not everyone can afford food. There is starvation across the globe including within the U.S. You are correct that if you have wealth you do not starve. Not so true for those without wealth.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic »
Add Reply