4 ms·

Crypto holder here (but not a millionare). Who says government isn't the reason they haven't done something else? If there were no government, you could just

Crypto holder here (but not a millionare). Who says government isn't the reason they haven't done something else? If there were no government, you could just "deal" with the problem person that stole your money yourself.

salt-thrower 5y ago
Go ahead and say the quiet part out loud - how would someone "deal" with the problem person in the world you're describing?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  Apparently in your idea, if someone were forced to live in a society with no law, order, or organization they should just peacefully let themselves be parted with all they have by anyone who cares to take it.
  - salt-thrower 5y ago
    If all you're really saying is "without government there would be vigilante justice instead" then you're correct, but it's quite a non-sequitur in relation to the rest of the discussion in this thread.
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      All I'm saying is without government or any organization you are left with taking care of things yourself, rather than policeman with guns maybe taking care of the problem for you. Let's say the government doesn't care at all about their loss (pretty common for fraud crimes in the US, I myself have been a victim of credit card fraud and no one cared even my bank who charged me anyway after I proved it was fraudulent) they actually do manage to get their property back from the person who stole it without government intervention, but they did it through direct rather than governmental action. Who cares, and what are you going to do about it? Sit back in your chair and type about the injustice of a man taking his property back without begging a policeman on his knees to consider giving the slightest care? It's nice that your moral outrage will be present but the pragmatism remains.
- robbedpeter 5y ago
  I'd hunt down the offender in monster trucks with flamethrowing guitars.
voz_ 5y ago
This is the most insane take. Are you seriously saying that you want a world where people just take matters into their own hands for everything like this? A vigilante oriented eye-for-an-eye society?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  If someone takes your property, you should have the agency to get it back. What do you think the government will do to you if you don't pay millions in taxes? You don't think armed agents will come (even before you are convicted)? We live in a land of law and order. Without any law or order, or organization, your recourse is to do something similar to what the IRS does when they do not get paid.
  - salt-thrower 5y ago
    > We live in a land of law and order. This is pretty rich coming from someone who's legitimately suggesting vigilante justice as a policy. "Law and order for thee, freedom to be judge, jury and executioner for me."
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      No, I said without a government you could just "deal" with it yourself. I didn't say if government was good or bad. The statement here was folks were up in arms that someone was talking about going through legal process to get bitcoin back. Now you're upset that I stated that government was what was holding them back from taking non-legal options. Tell me oh wise one, how do you get your money back if you live in a place with no government or organization and there are no legal means? Do you expect all of society is just going to get it back for you? All you'd have is yourself, and your way to deal with it.
      - salt-thrower 5y ago
viraptor 5y ago
You're skipping the other side of it, where someone else also "deals" with you as a problem. Not that you stole anything. They just can, because they have more force available and no government means they can. Dystopian fiction is not something to strive for.
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  And you're skipping the part where I never said it was a better system, just that it is your recourse if you live in a completely unorganized (or unjust) society.
  - viraptor 5y ago
    I'm not saying you presented it as better. Just that the idea is moot. If you can use vigilante justice, then everyone can do the opposite. It's just not a realistic option where you have the chance to "recover" something. The thing was never "stolen" in that world, because taking things from others is how that world would work.
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      Property rights can exist in a world without formal government. Primates have innate understanding of fairness. The idea of ownership of something predates the system of judge and jury, modern government, and even the presence of humans [1]. If someone takes your personal property, you have the right to take it back. It needn't be recognized by some formal entity. People can already "do the opposite." Hooded men in the middle of the night could try to take your possessions. The odds the police will show up in time is slim; at least in the US especially in rural areas your only chance is to take retaining your possessions in your own hands. Removing governmental restraint just prevents you from being convicted in court if you act directly instead of using the gun of a policeman. This is why in places like Texas is it legal to shoot someone for trespassing on your land and taking your property; some would argue that should extend to your virtual property such as bitcoin. [1] See citations regarding primate behavior ("property in primates") in https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214043811.pdf https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214043811.pdf

salt-thrower 5y ago

Go ahead and say the quiet part out loud - how would someone "deal" with the problem person in the world you're describing?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
quantumBerry 5y ago
Apparently in your idea, if someone were forced to live in a society with no law, order, or organization they should just peacefully let themselves be parted with all they have by anyone who cares to take it.
- salt-thrower 5y ago
  If all you're really saying is "without government there would be vigilante justice instead" then you're correct, but it's quite a non-sequitur in relation to the rest of the discussion in this thread.
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    All I'm saying is without government or any organization you are left with taking care of things yourself, rather than policeman with guns maybe taking care of the problem for you. Let's say the government doesn't care at all about their loss (pretty common for fraud crimes in the US, I myself have been a victim of credit card fraud and no one cared even my bank who charged me anyway after I proved it was fraudulent) they actually do manage to get their property back from the person who stole it without government intervention, but they did it through direct rather than governmental action. Who cares, and what are you going to do about it? Sit back in your chair and type about the injustice of a man taking his property back without begging a policeman on his knees to consider giving the slightest care? It's nice that your moral outrage will be present but the pragmatism remains.
robbedpeter 5y ago
I'd hunt down the offender in monster trucks with flamethrowing guitars.

voz_ 5y ago

This is the most insane take. Are you seriously saying that you want a world where people just take matters into their own hands for everything like this? A vigilante oriented eye-for-an-eye society?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
quantumBerry 5y ago
If someone takes your property, you should have the agency to get it back. What do you think the government will do to you if you don't pay millions in taxes? You don't think armed agents will come (even before you are convicted)? We live in a land of law and order. Without any law or order, or organization, your recourse is to do something similar to what the IRS does when they do not get paid.
- salt-thrower 5y ago
  > We live in a land of law and order. This is pretty rich coming from someone who's legitimately suggesting vigilante justice as a policy. "Law and order for thee, freedom to be judge, jury and executioner for me."
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    No, I said without a government you could just "deal" with it yourself. I didn't say if government was good or bad. The statement here was folks were up in arms that someone was talking about going through legal process to get bitcoin back. Now you're upset that I stated that government was what was holding them back from taking non-legal options. Tell me oh wise one, how do you get your money back if you live in a place with no government or organization and there are no legal means? Do you expect all of society is just going to get it back for you? All you'd have is yourself, and your way to deal with it.
    - salt-thrower 5y ago

viraptor 5y ago

You're skipping the other side of it, where someone else also "deals" with you as a problem. Not that you stole anything. They just can, because they have more force available and no government means they can. Dystopian fiction is not something to strive for.

quantumBerry 5y ago
And you're skipping the part where I never said it was a better system, just that it is your recourse if you live in a completely unorganized (or unjust) society.
- viraptor 5y ago
  I'm not saying you presented it as better. Just that the idea is moot. If you can use vigilante justice, then everyone can do the opposite. It's just not a realistic option where you have the chance to "recover" something. The thing was never "stolen" in that world, because taking things from others is how that world would work.
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    Property rights can exist in a world without formal government. Primates have innate understanding of fairness. The idea of ownership of something predates the system of judge and jury, modern government, and even the presence of humans [1]. If someone takes your personal property, you have the right to take it back. It needn't be recognized by some formal entity. People can already "do the opposite." Hooded men in the middle of the night could try to take your possessions. The odds the police will show up in time is slim; at least in the US especially in rural areas your only chance is to take retaining your possessions in your own hands. Removing governmental restraint just prevents you from being convicted in court if you act directly instead of using the gun of a policeman. This is why in places like Texas is it legal to shoot someone for trespassing on your land and taking your property; some would argue that should extend to your virtual property such as bitcoin. [1] See citations regarding primate behavior ("property in primates") in https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214043811.pdf https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214043811.pdf