The God of the Machine - Tranche 16
Posted by mshupe 1 year, 9 months ago to Government
Chapter VIII, Excerpt 1 of 1
The Fallacy of Anarchism
Government originates in the moral faculty. The essence of self-government consists in keeping promises; the formal organization is instituted by agreement, and the power is delegated for the purpose of maintaining contract freely entered . . . embodied in the constitution, and private contracts between individuals. The mode of the conversion of energy must correspond to the mode of association. Anarchy is practicable only to savagery. Force is what is governed.
But war and leadership seem to by synchronous. A regime of popularity is effective for starting a war; and indeed, must do so. The error can be maintained only by rejecting the facts of savage behavior and the specific testimony of intelligent savages as to the purpose of the council of war. Primitive war can be begun and carried on by impulse of fighting men. They are the force. In no case could the council apply force. They simply had none.
The initial truth is brought to light whenever citizen or subject is sufficiently determined; force cannot compel obedience in the social order. What it can effect is death, whether of subject or king. Leadership is obliged to justify itself daily. In a settled and productive society, continuity is necessary, with the time space factor in economics. While industry got up steam during the nineteenth century, political changes were in reverse, more power accruing to government under ‘socializing’ measures.
The Fallacy of Anarchism
Government originates in the moral faculty. The essence of self-government consists in keeping promises; the formal organization is instituted by agreement, and the power is delegated for the purpose of maintaining contract freely entered . . . embodied in the constitution, and private contracts between individuals. The mode of the conversion of energy must correspond to the mode of association. Anarchy is practicable only to savagery. Force is what is governed.
But war and leadership seem to by synchronous. A regime of popularity is effective for starting a war; and indeed, must do so. The error can be maintained only by rejecting the facts of savage behavior and the specific testimony of intelligent savages as to the purpose of the council of war. Primitive war can be begun and carried on by impulse of fighting men. They are the force. In no case could the council apply force. They simply had none.
The initial truth is brought to light whenever citizen or subject is sufficiently determined; force cannot compel obedience in the social order. What it can effect is death, whether of subject or king. Leadership is obliged to justify itself daily. In a settled and productive society, continuity is necessary, with the time space factor in economics. While industry got up steam during the nineteenth century, political changes were in reverse, more power accruing to government under ‘socializing’ measures.
The right thing to do would be to have that person pay off as much as possible, regardless of whether the whole thing can be paid off or not. Obviously, they would have to work to pay it off into the future, possibly until death.
One off the wall idea is to have the perpetrator birth children and have them pay off the damage until it is fully paid off, but that is morally questionable. Also, probably not very practical.
Another idea is to invent life extension technology.
The wrong thing to do would be to put that person in prison for life.
1. The tax payers are going to pay the prison expenses. What did they ever do to deserve this?
2. The victim doesn't get anything back.
3. The perpetrator is forced into a situation in which they are not very productive. Why not allow them to do what they are good at and use the labor to repay damages?
Imprisonment should be avoided if possible. Maybe have that person go through some sort of rehab where they admit wrongdoing, admit their debt to the victim and agree to rejoin society as normal, and have them devote themselves to repaying damages. If they don't admit anything and the wrongdoing is proven beyond reasonable doubt then we can allow them to be forced to work it off in some sort of labor camp that would maximize wages of the imprisoned (and redirect them to the victim after taking out the expenses).
Death penalty is just stupid IMHO. Why waste a perfectly good body?
In it he makes rational arguments for private justice system among other things.
It is available for free download at:
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Machine...
There is an interesting review of the book here:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/03/18...
Just shrug and say "oh well" ?
Yes, it would be great to finally leave this madhouse and move to space. It would require certain technologies but looks like those are slowly getting developed.
does not work
the basic problem is people suck
and with too many people, you get a mess
as we see in the United States now
in the past it kinda worked as people could walk away
now, no place to walk away to....
getting people off the Earth will open new places to walk away to
and like mined people can gather
until then, we will have war, strife
as this planet is too small
Predation in society always tends upwards unless there is a force that is destroying it, such as a war. You see, when there is a very low amount of prey (productive people), predators start going after each other (war, societal collapse). They almost completely exterminate themselves such that only the very small amount of productive people are left. Society can then restart with nearly zero predation.
I think my theory better explains the current situation than just people being fat and lazy.
The state is a predator, by the way. You have been warned.
READ THE DEC ON IND
for the solution
You, on the other hand, advocate for state violence (without any justifiable reason). So, I would consider you in the wrong here.
you are missing lots
the basic issue is that We the People have grown fat and lazy and life has become way too easy so people have let stuff grow out of hand
and those that swore Oath site on their hands doing nothing
so now the a major swing has to happen the other way...
just not openly
If you read some of my other posts elsewhere, you might get a better idea.
I propose that there is a universal law system that can be derived from basic axioms, such as the golden rule, by applying logic and reason. One of the laws is the immorality of violence (except maybe for self-defense). My view is that state is illegal/immoral according to this universal law because it uses violence to force people to do stuff (without it being self-defense).
You may have a state that adheres to this universal law but it might as well be a private security firm at that point due to fact that it wouldn't have any special (immoral) privileges that you, the masses, are currently giving the state.
I don't see how my ideas of the universal law and prohibition of all-powerful monopoly criminal organization (the state) would suddenly cause all productivity and innovation to cease, supply networks and energy flows to stop and tribal competition and warfare to begin. The enforceable standard would be the universal law derived at by logic and reason with logic proofs available for everyone to check (and not corrupt statist legislature deciding laws on a whim). I agree with you that force is bad but I disagree with you that only a single (prone to corruption) organization (the state) is allowed to bestow it.
go make you own
get like minded people
if you can find enough
May I remind you that ad hominem is against the rules?
Clearly, nonconformist is using words disconnected from reality, no concepts needed – a word salad similarly employed by the Vice President.
You’ve done a good thing bringing this book to this venue. Please stop responding to this fool. You are just wasting your valuable time. You are boxing with fog.
nice try skippy
try again....
or
don't bother
clearly you are goading people
read the US Dec of Independence for a clue
How is competition good for the private sector but not good for things like security?
Let's say a private security firm that was granted a contract to provide security for a city screws up. They would be fired and replaced with somebody more competent. Try doing that with your government agency. You'd probably end up in jail or killed.
Am I missing something?
Load more comments...