I'm not EXACTLY sure I agree, however, what I can say is that we can slash a huge amount of people from governement and simply automate them away.
For example the european union started as an economic zone only. Of course, that was just the secret wedge some groups needed to insert the political integration and now they are in a huge fucking mess.
Well, the EU is a meaningless idea culturally, you cannot integrate the norse with the italians, italians are niggers with the iq and culture of niggers. But, you can simply delete all the political integration bullshit and totally automate all of the trade stuff so that when goods go across borders that it is seamless and that inspections, tarifs, paperwork and everything along those lines is done automatically.
You can extend that idea to most government services that we might want to agree to pay for.
But, I am open to the no government idea, I have come a long way just to get to the above position.
I'm not EXACTLY sure I agree, however, what I can say is that we can slash a huge amount of people from governement and simply automate them away.
That won't change anything. The people who like to dick around with other people's lives will just become the people who make and program the automation. You can't fight human nature that way. The ONLY way to fight human nature is with human nature. That's why capitalism works so well, because it pits greed against greed. It's like tying a bunch of dogs together to keep them from going anywhere.
A government that protects against tyranny has to be built so that power-hungry ambitious people work at cross-purposes to each other. They'll spend most of their time trying to kneecap their competition and won't have enough time to worry about the width of your walkway. To put it in programmer's terms, you have to build a honeypot for those sorts of personalities and let them exhaust themselves trying to come out on top.
The only other thing that might work is Plato's idea of compulsory government service in place of elected officials. Think of it like jury duty, but you could be assigned to anything. You could even be assigned to be mayor, or city council. By assigning roles you limit the ability of the sociopaths and ladder-climbers from monopolizing the system.
Even if you accepted government as it is today in the United States, from the federal down to the city, each adult in the United States would only have to do 4 weeks of assigned government service to cover every government employee position there is in the country.
There is room for exploration here. Good points.
And in the case of assigned service, then you would truly have a government of the people. Quite literally.
The thing is that I will never agree to pay for any government service. And as long as someone says, "well 6 out of 10 of us decided we are doing it so pay up", you will always be infringing on my God-given right to figure out my own shit.
So power stolen from me to give to someone else to beat me up (without me being able to defend myself) for not complying with something I didn't agree with? Fuck that.
Governments are simply defined as the entities that exert a monopoly of violence on a certain population. I refuse to give up my right to violence, freely.
I wouldn't mind exploring this argument, but in another thread on another day.
:)
I appreciate the perspective, there is a lot there to get through right now.
The thing is that I will never agree to pay for any government service. And as long as someone says, "well 6 out of 10 of us decided we are doing it so pay up", you will always be infringing on my God-given right to figure out my own shit.
I agree. I'm just saying you can't have a human system where there's no concentration of power. It's literally impossible. So our choices are basically a system where extortion is only allowed when a majority approve it, or we can have a system where it's allowed whenever somebody has enough power to do so if they choose. There aren't other options.
Governments are simply defined as the entities that exert a monopoly of violence on a certain population.
The government doesn't have a monopoly on violence. Anybody can walk outside and commit any violence they choose any time they choose. The government just has enough power that they can and will visit violence upon anybody who commits violence they do not approve of. People could choose to do the same to government officials exercising violence, but they choose not to. The problem always boils down to what the people will allow. There's a big difference between what people say they want and will allow, and what they really want and allow.
They weren't always this way. One thousand years of rapes a d invasions paid its toll
(post is archived)