3 ms·

It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere". The thing is

by snitko 13y ago

It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere". The thing is, I realize a lot of people are not ready to be unplugged. That's fine. But there are a lot of people who share my views who would like to live without a government and who know how to do it. The problem for these people is that all the land is taken by states already. And, mind you, most of it is unused. It doesn't have to be some really good land, Las Vegas was built in the desert after all. I guarantee you, if such a land was made available, you would see an unprecedented migration of people and businesses into it and a huge economic boom. The reason it's not available is because states are mostly afraid that if they sell a piece of land to someone completely (that is, allow to secede) many more would follow.

p1esk 13y ago
It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere" Ok, good point. The society without any government is possible in theory. It's possible that in the distant future, human civilization will evolve to some kind of government-free organization. However, you are claiming that it is possible today. Let's say we completely remove all people from California, restore it to its wild prehistoric state, and declare it a government-free zone. Anyone can move there and do whatever they like. No laws, no infrastructure, no social services, just wild nature. The blank slate. Let's say a lot of all kinds of people from all over the world will move there and will want to start a new life. Also, for the sake of the argument, let's say no outside influence will be exerted on that land, it will be allowed to develop independently. Please describe what is going to happen there in the next 100 years? What makes you think it will be different this time around than how it was 200 years ago?
- snitko 13y ago
  Oh, no, I never said it's possible now. Or, to be precise, I never said it is possible at the current state of understanding of the world most people have. For most people, a state is like religion. If you burn a church in a village the villagers don't become atheists. My point is that there are people who understand liberty and understand how to build a free society. They would like an exit. The problem, in my view, is that those in power wouldn't allow them such an exit, because as soon as others see them succeed, the state would lose its legitimacy. You ask me, what is my solution to this? 1. Educate people about the evil and predatory nature of the state 2. Use Bitcoin. And that's all I have to say about the war in Vietnam.
  - p1esk 13y ago
    current state of understanding of the world most people have Your problem is you believe you understand the world better than others. You want to educate others, but even here on this forum, where people generally listen to reason, and are disillusioned with the government, you haven't persuaded anyone with your arguments. For me, a state is not a religion. For me government is a service, and I'm fine paying for that service. I'm fine trading some of my freedom for security, stability, and comfort. I still have plenty of freedom left. I honestly don't understand what are you complaining about. If you're living in Russia, and your life there sucks, just move to a country with a better government, with better laws, or with better whatever it is you're not happy about.
    - snitko 13y ago
      You see, it's not about Russia or any other specific country. Russia has a lot more freedoms in certain areas than European countries and the US. It's a matter of principle. As for believing my understanding of the world is better - isn't it what most people who are trying to convince others of anything believe they have? I mean, what kind of moron would I be if I tried to convince people of something I didn't believe myself? Oh, wait, I'd be a politician. Also, I don't particularly enjoy running around and preaching. HN is interesting because some people here indeed listen carefully and actually read your arguments, sometimes presenting challenging questions.

by snitko 13y ago

p1esk 13y ago

It's like going back to the 17-th century and saying, "surely, if a society could function without slaves, we would've seen an example somewhere" Ok, good point. The society without any government is possible in theory. It's possible that in the distant future, human civilization will evolve to some kind of government-free organization. However, you are claiming that it is possible today. Let's say we completely remove all people from California, restore it to its wild prehistoric state, and declare it a government-free zone. Anyone can move there and do whatever they like. No laws, no infrastructure, no social services, just wild nature. The blank slate. Let's say a lot of all kinds of people from all over the world will move there and will want to start a new life. Also, for the sake of the argument, let's say no outside influence will be exerted on that land, it will be allowed to develop independently. Please describe what is going to happen there in the next 100 years? What makes you think it will be different this time around than how it was 200 years ago?

snitko 13y ago
Oh, no, I never said it's possible now. Or, to be precise, I never said it is possible at the current state of understanding of the world most people have. For most people, a state is like religion. If you burn a church in a village the villagers don't become atheists. My point is that there are people who understand liberty and understand how to build a free society. They would like an exit. The problem, in my view, is that those in power wouldn't allow them such an exit, because as soon as others see them succeed, the state would lose its legitimacy. You ask me, what is my solution to this? 1. Educate people about the evil and predatory nature of the state 2. Use Bitcoin. And that's all I have to say about the war in Vietnam.
- p1esk 13y ago
  current state of understanding of the world most people have Your problem is you believe you understand the world better than others. You want to educate others, but even here on this forum, where people generally listen to reason, and are disillusioned with the government, you haven't persuaded anyone with your arguments. For me, a state is not a religion. For me government is a service, and I'm fine paying for that service. I'm fine trading some of my freedom for security, stability, and comfort. I still have plenty of freedom left. I honestly don't understand what are you complaining about. If you're living in Russia, and your life there sucks, just move to a country with a better government, with better laws, or with better whatever it is you're not happy about.
  - snitko 13y ago
    You see, it's not about Russia or any other specific country. Russia has a lot more freedoms in certain areas than European countries and the US. It's a matter of principle. As for believing my understanding of the world is better - isn't it what most people who are trying to convince others of anything believe they have? I mean, what kind of moron would I be if I tried to convince people of something I didn't believe myself? Oh, wait, I'd be a politician. Also, I don't particularly enjoy running around and preaching. HN is interesting because some people here indeed listen carefully and actually read your arguments, sometimes presenting challenging questions.