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.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
if you believe that, you are delusional
The private security firm would presumably do everything in a lawful manner, probably better then your state enforcers.
A private security firm would not force their 'security services' on people. People would hire them voluntarily. Your state goons, on the other hand, are suspiciously looking like they are running a protection racket. They take your money by force and if you don't comply, they come to fuck your shit up and throw you in jail. How is that not a protection racket? At least with a private security firm you have a choice, so, over time only the most conscientious firms would have business.
We've already talked earlier about what I think is the source of all the trouble: predation. Giving the job of law enforcement to the state is like giving the job of guarding the hen house to the fox. The end result isn't going to be good.
As far as I know, the dark ages happened because Roman Empire collapsed. That happened because it became corrupted from within (predation). If people become non-productive and start stealing from each other, I think it is pretty obvious some shit is going to go down.
The statist propaganda would like everyone to believe that if the state is dissolved, everybody would die. However, that is not necessarily the case. They might die, if the state is killed by the collapse of society due to predation. Alternatively, there might be a civilization boom because there is less parasites running around forcing people to give them all their money.
By punishing someone, not only are you causing disproportional damage to them, but you are also causing damage (money/time/risk) to yourself without any way to get back what was lost.
Making an example out of a perpetrator would also be immoral.
You have the right to recover damages from the perpetrator and to also to recover funds spent bringing them to 'justice'. If they need mental help/rehabilitation, they might need to pay for that too. However, it would be immoral to make them suffer more loss than the above.
Prison is immoral.