Create account

replied 2445d
Sk8eM dUb
Not.
As a parent you owe your child a debt repayable.
Many cultures view this backward:
they think the child owes the parent - which defies any kind of logic whatsoever.
1 / 43 1
546
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
You're speaking religious language right now. I want game theory. I value a society where as few children as humanly possible are abused. If that means police, then so be it. Worth it.
replied 2445d
as much as people don’t want to admit there is a price for everything even human life. Exaggeration but if we spend $1B on enforcement and only save 1 kid that isn’t worth it.
2
1,500
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2444d
The issue I'm getting at is that when every individual has to act as their own(and their own kids) security force, that's more expensive than pooling your resources for some police!
1
1,052
replied 2442d
Even more efficient than being forced to pool your resources is to choose to pool your resources.
replied 2442d
There are examples of private police forces protecting the homeless or people who can’t pay.
replied 2442d
Just like you don’t have to grow your own food or make your own car or make your own computer. You could pay for varying levels of defense.
replied 2442d
If it is more efficient to pool resources (as I think it is too) then people in the market will pool resources (like most all companies that exists now).
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2439d
I'm all about having local police only. A city can be a good little unit if the people care about the upkeep. If police are beyond 1 degree of separation you start getting problems.
1
4,052
replied 2445d
you're willing to make the sacrifice of freedom but you're also forcing everyone else to make that sacrifice. there is also an opportunity cost associated this enforcement.
replied 2445d
Not religious at all.
You physically choose to make a baby.
The baby will eventually die.
If you did not create a baby that person would not die.
Thus, you have committed murder
replied 2445d
Because you have murdered someone in the future,
you now owe them more than you can ever repay.
Any failure to protect them at least until they are competent is Harm.
2
1,657
replied 2445d
Failing this quite simple logic means
that if you abuse or otherwise Harm you own children you are no better than an animal.
(more to come...)
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
I'm not talking about ME, I talking about the billion odd children alive on the planet right now. I'm absolutely willing to "Harm" people who intend to "Harm" kids.
replied 2445d
People ?!?
they are not people
They exist outside The One Law and can only be regarded as you might regard crocodiles, sharks, tigers or other carnivorous beasts.
'Open Season'.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
I play this game when chatting with Utopians where I look for the point when I start to feel that, if they were put in charge, I'd probably be killed for thought crime. This is it.
replied 2445d
Identifying and exiling animals who prey upon or abuse children is a ranching activity,
and requires no special government goon-squads.
It could be a good business opportunity.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
What if they get falsely accused?
replied 2445d
This does happen entirely too often.
It fairly results in both accuser and accused needing to justify themselves to their neighbors.
This justifies an open court to appeal to.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
UH OHHHH, sounds like you got a government!
SubjectiveReality
replied 2439d
@dash you should read up on English common law. Imperfect, but a self-organizing and determmining justice system that seeks truth through wisdomof the crowd over time
replied 2445d
There is a BIG difference between governing and neighbors.
Government is all about organizing thugs+taxes.
An open court a neigborhood might hold to examine an exile event.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
But you can't give me a solid figure on the question "how big is too big?". Tell me how organized is too organized. What should I do if I see an organization of people getting too big?
1
1,024
replied 2445d
Government is a croup of people organized to continually coerce a population.
Any size is too big.
A single problem may be solved by a single-session court, ad-hoc.
1
1,111
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Marxists like to change the definitions of words too.
replied 2445d
"What should I do if I see an organization of people getting too big?"
Difficult !
Is it popular ? For what reason ?
If popular for Harm it is probably time to move elsewhere.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
You're going to be a lonely nomad you're whole life then. People get together to do stuff they couldn't do alone. If it's valuable but has been corrupted I think fixing > abandoning
replied 2445d
A mostly lonely nomad my whole life already.
Nothing new there.
Populations do not often cooperate with being fixed.
Sometimes letting Darwin deal with it is the only solution.
replied 2445d
This underscores the issue of a population that "learns".
In theory an organization that can cause Harm should always be a one-off,
Exiling someone should never be something "easy".
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Quit making up rules!! Rules necessarily means cops!! I thought we wanted anarchy dammit!
replied 2445d
Rules ?
This I only suggest for those who find themselves in such circumstance.
And:
there is no reason a neighborhood might not form its own One-Law contract if 100% agree.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Sounds like a commune to me lol. "Don't piss off Jim's wife, you might get exiled!!"
replied 2445d
Nothing ever conceived changes human nature to revert to behaviours common around the globe.
The mind boggles at what transpires under the banner "Let's go make our utopian commune"
replied 2445d
Excellent question.
"Permanent" Organizations have participants with hidden agendas.
Persistent hierarchy also indicates issues.
The village idiot should chair occasionally.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
On the fascinating subject of village idiots: https://stottilien.com/2013/04/03/crazy-wisdom-the-archetype-of-the-fool-the-clown-the-jester-and-the-trickster/
1
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Wait did you just describe the USA!?!?!
1
640
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
The problem I have with anarchists and marxists alike is y'all make these "should", "would", "could" statements without ever giving a method for enforcement.
replied 2445d
these are serving suggestions, not iron-fists
Enforcement is forbidden.
Fences not.
Thieves should be perfectly free to starve to death in the town square.
Or accept exile.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
This society sounds lonely, boring, dangerous and stressful. You should visit me in Japan. It's not perfect by any stretch but they stumbled upon some secret sauce.
2
1,000
replied 2445d
The secret sauce is a very, very well honed sense of shame. It's a natural prophylactic against humanity's innate douchebaggery.
2
1,052
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Shame is just another term for social-contract. I also think the balance between internal and external influence is great. They maintain a national identity without getting too cocky.
replied 2445d
I will look you up, it is on my bucket list and they have some amazing things I know.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2445d
Sounds good! I gotta make dinner for the misses. Peace!
1
1,052
replied 2445d
Boss just ordered me to put my shackles back on for supper.
At least she does the cooking
Prosper !
1
10,000


About Privacy Terms Stats