POG Politics Thread - Page 505 - Puzzles and Other Games Forum

It is quite the irony though that the way to "progressive anarchism" is with more government and less free market, and that to minimize this theoretical theft you need actual theft.

08-11-2012 , 12:05 AM

#12602

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

1/ Progression involves using the structures and institutions that exist towards the better end. Why should I prefer chaos? That would not at all serve the end I desire.
2/ People who call taxation "theft" just sound childish to me. We should let you free ride because you're greedy?

08-11-2012 , 12:06 AM

#12603

Anarchist

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 75,871

wait a second, you think calling taxation theft is a bigger stretch than calling property theft?

08-11-2012 , 12:09 AM

#12604

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkey Banana

yes, an entity taking money directly from me against my will is the very definition of theft, and the people you want to give even more help to are the ones free riding now who dont pay tax. although I can see how me purchasing and owning a book is exactly the same when discussing theft.

honestly this might be your worst post in the thread. you are an anarchist who wants more government institution? what?

08-11-2012 , 12:14 AM

#12605

sufur

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,364

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

what's hard to understand about that?

taxation = theft is silly. property = theft is more nuanced, probably still silly but not at all related (outside the language being used).

08-11-2012 , 12:15 AM

#12606

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

and the difference between "silly" and "more nuanced" is.... because you said so?

08-11-2012 , 12:16 AM

#12607

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

No, it's pretty obvious to anyone who thinks about it.

08-11-2012 , 12:17 AM

#12608

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

Yes, it's obvious to all that the way to anarchism is more government and that one entity taking money from another is not theft.

Still haven't explained how propertyless society would work.

08-11-2012 , 12:20 AM

#12609

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

I don't know how many times I have to say that money is not real and explain why before I am just going to accept that you're trolling.

Anarchism is not chaos. Is that hard to understand? It's not devil take the hindmost and it's not let's just get rid of all structure and see what happens. Anyone who wants that is an idiot not an anarchist.

08-11-2012 , 12:23 AM

#12610

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

Money represents a certain amount of goods/services that I can have. When I have less money, I can get less real goods/services.

I know it's not chaos. But it is a stateless society. You are proposing an increased amount of state to get there by forcing people to live how you want them to.

08-11-2012 , 12:26 AM

#12611

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

I am a huge fan of Rousseau and as so often he is right about property. Enjoy!

Quote:

THE first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."

It's a natural consequence of Rousseau's view to believe that property is theft. Proudhon correctly draws an analogy to slavery:

Quote:

If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder!, my meaning would be understood at once. No extended argument would be required . . . Why, then, to this other question: What is property? may I not likewise answer, It is robbery!, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first?

dkgojackets, to my great enjoyment, takes the same line in discussing this as that great philosopher Karl Marx.

08-11-2012 , 12:27 AM

#12612

sufur

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,364

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

and the difference between "silly" and "more nuanced" is.... because you said so?

um, ldo

08-11-2012 , 12:29 AM

#12613

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

so basically you want a world that is an impossibility as long as people are people

08-11-2012 , 12:32 AM

#12614

sufur

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,364

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

so basically you want a world that is an impossibility as long as people are people

wait, aren't you a libertarian? libertarianism will only ever work people weren't people and besides that reality, people would never, ever, never ever ever sign on to a libertarian system. it just won't happen. ever.

08-11-2012 , 12:32 AM

#12615

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

Taxation simply gives the government space to pursue its own spending. Because, whether you believe you do or not, you benefit from that spending, you must take your share in providing that space. Nothing is stolen from you: the money is issued by the government in the first place.

Your second paragraph does not contain enough meaning to contend with, I'm afraid. I believe in incrementally approaching the world I'd like to see. Does that mean you are "forced" to do what you want to do? Well that depends what you want to do but not really, unless what you want to do is harmful to others.

08-11-2012 , 12:33 AM

#12616

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

so basically you want a world that is an impossibility as long as people are people

Please note that I constantly emphasise the progressive nature of my programme. I have a lot more faith in people than you do, also.

08-11-2012 , 12:37 AM

#12617

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkey Banana

Alright, so lets say instead of money a company gives its workers food and other items. The government then takes twenty percent of that haul from everybody.

Is this stealing?

If no, then clearly the issue isn't with "money".

08-11-2012 , 12:42 AM

#12618

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

Does the government use food and other items as currency? Is it the source of the food and other items?

False analogy and strawman all in one. Nice.

08-11-2012 , 12:43 AM

#12619

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

Of course it isn't the source of food and other items. Those are generated by individuals and businesses.

08-11-2012 , 12:44 AM

#12620

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

So you have made an improper analogy.

08-11-2012 , 12:46 AM

#12621

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

So your answer would be yes, that is stealing?

08-11-2012 , 12:48 AM

#12622

dkgojackets

DKGOAT

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 86,123

And it follows that there should be no tax on people in the US if they are compensated directly with products?

08-11-2012 , 12:48 AM

#12623

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

It's funny because that was in fact how governments worked when they had a largely nonmonetary economy. Also, it's not far from how things will work if you guys get your libertarian paradise.

08-11-2012 , 12:50 AM

#12624

Monkey Banana

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 40,103

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkgojackets

And it follows that there should be no tax on people in the US if they are compensated directly with products?

If you are seriously suggesting that the US should pursue a barter economy you should prepare yourself for some derisive laughter.

This from someone who complains that not allowing the rich to rape the poor without hindrance would prevent "development". LOLOL.