4 ms·

We already have laws about which animals can be kept as pets. This is hardly an egregious extension of that power. The law is very plainly there to prevent gui

We already have laws about which animals can be kept as pets. This is hardly an egregious extension of that power. The law is very plainly there to prevent guinea pigs from being abused. It is not there to extend the government's power. What an extremely odd thing to argue.

wallace_f 9y ago
The concept is about 'what constitutes legitimate authority?' After all, consider your argument: >'we already have laws about which people can get married. This is hardly an egregious extension of that power. The law is very plainly there to protect children.' What you're advocating by disavowing the above, yet allowing the topic is to say you: "agree with authority when it happens to agree with my moral compass." Sayinf "disagreeing with this is an extremely odd thing to argue," reveals the fact that the original intentions of the founders of this country (assuming you live in the States), as well as those of Enlightenment figures, that government is only legitimate whwn it is limited, is so odd and alienating to you makes me think that no wonder humanity always turns itself in to tyranny, over and over again.
- badestrand 9y ago
  You might consider that Switzerland is probably the most democratic country on earth and "legitimate authority" quite directly means "the will of the people". If it wouldn't, they could easily change it as everybody can submit a law change suggestion (sorry, I don't know the correct term) and with enough inital support everyone can vote on the issue. They vote on far-ranging things several times a year, there can be no tyranny in this context.
  - lawl 9y ago
    > If it wouldn't, they could easily change it as everybody can submit a law change suggestion (sorry, I don't know the correct term) Referendum to kill an existing law, popular initiative to propose a new one. They use different tricks when they're extending their power. This is definitely not one of them. Laws they suspect could be overturned by voters they create 2 simular but separate ones shortly after each other, so people get tired of fighting it etc. It definitely doesn't involve guinea pigs.
    - wallace_f 9y ago
      It's not that anyone ever sat around a board room with an evil plot involving the protection of guinea pigs. It's that it is so normal that the state act as your parents, which was never the intention of Western democracies, that nobody even thinks "should we really be letting ourselves hand over so many decisions to a monopoly on violence?"
      - jackfraser 9y ago
        The thing is, once you have a monopoly on violence, you've inherently handed over all of your decisions to them already. (There's no alternative, though, so deal with it)
      - Matumio 9y ago
        I get the point you're trying to make, it's just that you have picked the perfect counter-example to make it against. Both with animal protection (no human will profit) and with Switzerland (we as citizens can force a popular vote against any law our elected government is about to pass, or even propose new laws).
        wallace_f 9y ago
        You're right that Switzerland is just about the least concerning place in the world in terms of government tyranny. However, there are problems with only starting to be critical when the government starts confiscating your phone at the airport, reading your email, etc. At this point you've even set precedent that they should be allowed to do those things, just so long as it can be justified as good, or even "the will of the people." So in this case we have ourselves to blame for this being in this mess. And this kind of government js actually quite a shift from the type of democracy that Enlightenment figures helped developed for us, which gave us so much in the world. Governments are responsible for most of the evil in the 20th century. Culling that probably starts with thinking about what a legitimate government should be permitted to do in the first place.
        lawl 9y ago
- staticassertion 9y ago
  Jesus fucking Christ. It is a law saying that if you want to own a guinea pig you must also own a friend for that guinea pig and you're talking about the founding fathers. I've read the rest of discussion and this is just the weirdest thing to trigger it.

wallace_f 9y ago

The concept is about 'what constitutes legitimate authority?' After all, consider your argument: >'we already have laws about which people can get married. This is hardly an egregious extension of that power. The law is very plainly there to protect children.' What you're advocating by disavowing the above, yet allowing the topic is to say you: "agree with authority when it happens to agree with my moral compass." Sayinf "disagreeing with this is an extremely odd thing to argue," reveals the fact that the original intentions of the founders of this country (assuming you live in the States), as well as those of Enlightenment figures, that government is only legitimate whwn it is limited, is so odd and alienating to you makes me think that no wonder humanity always turns itself in to tyranny, over and over again.

badestrand 9y ago
You might consider that Switzerland is probably the most democratic country on earth and "legitimate authority" quite directly means "the will of the people". If it wouldn't, they could easily change it as everybody can submit a law change suggestion (sorry, I don't know the correct term) and with enough inital support everyone can vote on the issue. They vote on far-ranging things several times a year, there can be no tyranny in this context.
- lawl 9y ago
  > If it wouldn't, they could easily change it as everybody can submit a law change suggestion (sorry, I don't know the correct term) Referendum to kill an existing law, popular initiative to propose a new one. They use different tricks when they're extending their power. This is definitely not one of them. Laws they suspect could be overturned by voters they create 2 simular but separate ones shortly after each other, so people get tired of fighting it etc. It definitely doesn't involve guinea pigs.
  - wallace_f 9y ago
    It's not that anyone ever sat around a board room with an evil plot involving the protection of guinea pigs. It's that it is so normal that the state act as your parents, which was never the intention of Western democracies, that nobody even thinks "should we really be letting ourselves hand over so many decisions to a monopoly on violence?"
    - jackfraser 9y ago
      The thing is, once you have a monopoly on violence, you've inherently handed over all of your decisions to them already. (There's no alternative, though, so deal with it)
    - Matumio 9y ago
      I get the point you're trying to make, it's just that you have picked the perfect counter-example to make it against. Both with animal protection (no human will profit) and with Switzerland (we as citizens can force a popular vote against any law our elected government is about to pass, or even propose new laws).
      - wallace_f 9y ago
        You're right that Switzerland is just about the least concerning place in the world in terms of government tyranny. However, there are problems with only starting to be critical when the government starts confiscating your phone at the airport, reading your email, etc. At this point you've even set precedent that they should be allowed to do those things, just so long as it can be justified as good, or even "the will of the people." So in this case we have ourselves to blame for this being in this mess. And this kind of government js actually quite a shift from the type of democracy that Enlightenment figures helped developed for us, which gave us so much in the world. Governments are responsible for most of the evil in the 20th century. Culling that probably starts with thinking about what a legitimate government should be permitted to do in the first place.
        lawl 9y ago
staticassertion 9y ago
Jesus fucking Christ. It is a law saying that if you want to own a guinea pig you must also own a friend for that guinea pig and you're talking about the founding fathers. I've read the rest of discussion and this is just the weirdest thing to trigger it.