4 ms·
But this argument based on "freedom" is silly. I am rather sure Ted's argument isn't that it's difficult to pay your taxes. His argument is for "complete freed
by zbuc 14y ago
But this argument based on "freedom" is silly.
I am rather sure Ted's argument isn't that it's difficult to pay your taxes. His argument is for "complete freedom" from what he views as technology. Social structures such as taxation are a form of technological innovation.
In his view, you wouldn't be enslaved to technology because it's difficult to pay your taxes with a computer instead of paper now(which, coincidentally, is also technology) but that you are enslaved to technology by virtue of being forced into this structure of taxation and the social contract.
At least that's the way I see it. It's the only way I can reconcile his philosophy. And it sounds like crap.
- ktizo 14y agoIs not an unreasonable philosophy to get pissed off with the bullshit of modern life and to go and live in the woods for a bit. Lots of people do that at one point or another. The unreasonable, or crazy, or just plain mean, miserable and bitter part is his thinking that he needs to save everyone else from themselves and to then try and do it by sending pipe bombs through the post. Whatever the lucidity of his arguments regarding the dangers of technology, they were all well spelled out in myth thousands of years before and are a foundation of our culture, so he is not a founder of some dangerous new philosphy, but rather is an arrogant murderous slave to one of the oldest ones.