This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ
Pages: 1 ... 175176177 178179 ... 256
5281
« on: March 28, 2015, 07:20:57 PM »
But specific economies cannot function without a rule function.
I don't disagree. The question is who can write those rules, and how should they be applied.
5282
« on: March 28, 2015, 07:11:56 PM »
Could you explain why this is? What makes you think allowing the players to define the game is efficient in any way?
Is the state not a player? There are no rules to this "game", and there never have been. Anarchy exists between states. You may have organizations made up of multiple states that make agreements as to what policies will and will not be tolerated within that organization, but there is no central state telling all of the others what to do.
5283
« on: March 28, 2015, 06:28:30 PM »
Because a legitimate concerted effort has been made, right? What is the Global War on Terror, if not a concerted effort to destroy groups like IS? they're significantly less inefficient than the market would be.
Could you explain why this is?
5284
« on: March 28, 2015, 06:16:04 PM »
Voting is a duty, at least ethically.
this
we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.
however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.
I'm sorry, is government a necessary component of oxygen?
What kind of retard can't live free of government?
read the Leviathan. we cannot exist without government. without a social contract we will tear each other to pieces.
you're doing a very poor job of convincing me that you have the ability to think.
and you're doing a very poor job of convincing me that you have the ability to think critically. You're citing one book, written over 350 years ago, a time when people in England were completely convinced that a god made the earth in 7 days, and many people were just getting over the idea that monarchs the right to rule because "god said so". Social contract theory is a fucking joke. There's nothing morally or ethically sound about this notion of a contract you can be born into without your knowledge or consent. To even call this a contract is farcical at best, and Orwellian at worst.
5285
« on: March 28, 2015, 06:00:53 PM »
Laws are opinions with guns behind them, nothing more.
Who gives a fuck?
I'd rather have a Buddhist behind me with a gun than a Muslim.
Are governments coercive? Yes. Are governments dangerous? Of course. Are they corrupt? Invariably. But it's nothing that would happen without some sort of centralised authority in question. Maniacal and fanatical groups like ISIS aren't going to give a fuck if our merchants are amiable.
You're assuming that the market cannot produce secular armed groups who can be paid to protect people. It's also worth noting that, without the state, nobody can enforce sharia. Nobody can disarm the populace to prevent them from fighting off the durkas themselves. Finally, you seem to have forgotten that the world's nation-states, which are more powerful than they have been at ANY point in history, have so far been unable to stop groups like IS anyway.
5286
« on: March 28, 2015, 05:48:52 PM »
Voting is a duty, at least ethically.
this
we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.
however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.
I'm sorry, is government a necessary component of oxygen?
What kind of retard can't live free of government?
read the Leviathan. we cannot exist without government. without a social contract we will tear each other to pieces.
5287
« on: March 28, 2015, 05:10:46 PM »
You can privatize pretty much anything
Not the law, or its enforcement.
Laws are opinions with guns behind them, nothing more. You don't need a central power to impose rules, nor do you necessarily need to enforce them through violence. I direct your attention to the medieval merchant law system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_mercatoriaThis was a system created and run by the merchantry, not the state. Rather than use violence to enforce rules, people can and do create their own codes to interact by, independent of government.
5288
« on: March 28, 2015, 04:57:47 PM »
Just pointing out that he's wrong in the fact that mandatory voting would necessarily be a violation of the freedom of speech. In Europe, at least, it's pretty generally accepted that as long as you have the option to issue a blank vote or pick no party to vote for, it's in no violation of your rights.
That is, in fact, a violation.
By choosing not to participate, I am expressing my disapproval of either the government or the democratic system. Just filling out a blank space is not the same.
Casting an erronous or spoiled vote does the same thing, in my opinion. Besides, you can always ignore the law. Few countries with compulsory voting actually enforce the rule.
If the law can be easily ignored, then there is no point in implementing it, is there?
5289
« on: March 28, 2015, 04:56:51 PM »
What kind of retard can't live free of government?
Say what you like, but government is necessary to have a functioning society and economy. Private enterprises simply cannot, in an efficient manner, operate services like security--be it domestic or foreign. A monopoly on the enforcement of rules is a must for any civilisation, whether or not you agree with the rules in question.
It's really not. You can privatize pretty much anything, and not only will it it run, it will run better than any centrally-run system.
5290
« on: March 28, 2015, 04:29:35 PM »
Just pointing out that he's wrong in the fact that mandatory voting would necessarily be a violation of the freedom of speech. In Europe, at least, it's pretty generally accepted that as long as you have the option to issue a blank vote or pick no party to vote for, it's in no violation of your rights.
That is, in fact, a violation. By choosing not to participate, I am expressing my disapproval of either the government or the democratic system. Just filling out a blank space is not the same.
5291
« on: March 28, 2015, 04:25:46 PM »
Voting is a duty, at least ethically.
this
we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.
however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.
I'm sorry, is government a necessary component of oxygen? What kind of retard can't live free of government?
5292
« on: March 28, 2015, 01:08:23 PM »
5293
« on: March 27, 2015, 07:23:37 PM »
Not sure.
Really with him when it comes to the SJW business. Don't know much about him besides.
I've heard he's anti-trans? Haven't seen proof though, but I never bothered to look. I'm honestly not sure how I feel about transsexuality anyway. I'm no psychologist.
5294
« on: March 27, 2015, 02:21:11 PM »
5295
« on: March 27, 2015, 12:35:29 PM »
The actual problems with female soldiers don't apply to police roles, so sure, why not.
5296
« on: March 26, 2015, 11:06:03 PM »
I can't take Cruz seriously because he's not even eligible for the presidency by his own 'rigorous' standards.
But meanwhile, Rand Paul keeps giving me reasons to not want to vote for him. Dammit, go back to the center!
Isn't Cruz an American citizen through his parents? Born in Canada, right? I mean, looking back at the birther movement it would be fitting for a Republican to be grilled over his eligibility for office, but Cruz' eligibility isn't really in question, is it?
5297
« on: March 26, 2015, 09:35:27 PM »
5298
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:59:41 PM »
war is fucking terrifying
what the hell is wrong with you people
Indeed but the Houthi rebels have no right to attack the current leader of Yemen.
If you want to talk about rights, what right does anybody have to declare himself the leader of anybody or anything?
I mean, Houthis are cunts, as are all Muslim militant groups, but let's not spout bullshit about leaders and rights.
Yeah but the current president Hadi is the leader by law.
A law is an opinion with a gun behind it.
5299
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:51:35 PM »
5300
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:48:36 PM »
The US military has prepared for literally every contingency, even a goddamn Zombie Apocalypse. What gives you any idea that some crappy conspiracy theorist militia could take down the strongest military on Earth?
Because the U.S. military is composed of those crappy conspiracy theorists and relies on them for funding.
Uh, what?
I think that the best-trained, best-equipped, and second largest military force in the world could defeat 500,000 to a million angry redneck insurgents with shotguns.
>implying the US military isn't made up of 50% crazy rednecks
>implying enlisted who joined for college money would actually be willing to fire on American citizens that aren't Muslims
Oh come on. Let's look at Syria's military during their little equivalent to your hypothetical scenario. 75% of their army are poorly trained, poorly equipped, unmotivated conscripts who went to war against their own war more blatantly than the US could ever do it, and only a third of their Army ever defected or sabotaged their own efforts. And 4 years later, they're holding their own ground against the 40% of the populace who wants to see them dead. God, they're so bad, that any citizen who can get their hands on an AK is pretty much equal to one of their soldiers.
If one of the most shittiest and poorly motivated militaries on Earth was able to hold together in blatant war against the citizens they're supposed to be protecting with only a third of them defecting (and defections have stopped), what makes you think one of the most motivated, best-equipped, and overall best military couldn't do the same? Not to mention peer pressure within the military to stay in. Why should soldiers abandon all their friends they've made in the military, and pretty much their entire life, just to join some insurgent movement which could be better or worse than what they're in right now.
FFS, if the US military went to war against its own people, you'd probably have a recruitment spike because people don't want to be killed/enslaved and because misguided patriotism is so rampant in this country.
Are you seriously comparing the United States of America to a country that literally only exists because the colonial powers drew its borders the wrong way?
Yes I am. And that is not relevant to anything whatsoever. If anything, that'd strengthen the legitimacy of the US military since they've existed since even before the US officially declared independence.
In all probability, this is how wars against countries' populace tend to go down. There are mass protests, then the Government refuses to compromise, then they open fire on the protests and soon after that, shit really goes down. And in some Black Helicopter-type scenario (which is what you're probably thinking of), the US would most likely cut out mass media (which is incredibly easy to do), so the population would be deprived of information. And information is power as we all know.
I honestly don't disagree that if there ever is a civil war scenario in the United States, people probably won't know what's going on. I think, though, it'd be because of the mass media. Painting any opposition as "domestic right-wing extremists" is not hard with corporate media that presents your average idiot with the illusion of honesty. I can see a lot of military defections, though. I know grunts. American military culture is not comparable to any Arab military, and our populace is much more interconnected than Syrians. Either way, having lots of rooty tooty point and shooties around wouldn't exactly be a huge disadvantage for a resistance movement.
5301
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:35:04 PM »
The US military has prepared for literally every contingency, even a goddamn Zombie Apocalypse. What gives you any idea that some crappy conspiracy theorist militia could take down the strongest military on Earth?
Because the U.S. military is composed of those crappy conspiracy theorists and relies on them for funding.
Uh, what?
I think that the best-trained, best-equipped, and second largest military force in the world could defeat 500,000 to a million angry redneck insurgents with shotguns.
>implying the US military isn't made up of 50% crazy rednecks
>implying enlisted who joined for college money would actually be willing to fire on American citizens that aren't Muslims
Oh come on. Let's look at Syria's military during their little equivalent to your hypothetical scenario. 75% of their army are poorly trained, poorly equipped, unmotivated conscripts who went to war against their own war more blatantly than the US could ever do it, and only a third of their Army ever defected or sabotaged their own efforts. And 4 years later, they're holding their own ground against the 40% of the populace who wants to see them dead. God, they're so bad, that any citizen who can get their hands on an AK is pretty much equal to one of their soldiers.
If one of the most shittiest and poorly motivated militaries on Earth was able to hold together in blatant war against the citizens they're supposed to be protecting with only a third of them defecting (and defections have stopped), what makes you think one of the most motivated, best-equipped, and overall best military couldn't do the same? Not to mention peer pressure within the military to stay in. Why should soldiers abandon all their friends they've made in the military, and pretty much their entire life, just to join some insurgent movement which could be better or worse than what they're in right now.
FFS, if the US military went to war against its own people, you'd probably have a recruitment spike because people don't want to be killed/enslaved and because misguided patriotism is so rampant in this country.
Are you seriously comparing the United States of America to a country that literally only exists because the colonial powers drew its borders the wrong way?
5302
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:29:58 PM »
war is fucking terrifying
what the hell is wrong with you people
Indeed but the Houthi rebels have no right to attack the current leader of Yemen.
If you want to talk about rights, what right does anybody have to declare himself the leader of anybody or anything? I mean, Houthis are cunts, as are all Muslim militant groups, but let's not spout bullshit about leaders and rights.
5303
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:27:09 PM »
The US military has prepared for literally every contingency, even a goddamn Zombie Apocalypse. What gives you any idea that some crappy conspiracy theorist militia could take down the strongest military on Earth?
Because the U.S. military is composed of those crappy conspiracy theorists and relies on them for funding.
Uh, what?
I think that the best-trained, best-equipped, and second largest military force in the world could defeat 500,000 to a million angry redneck insurgents with shotguns.
>implying the US military isn't made up of 50% crazy rednecks >implying enlisted who joined for college money would actually be willing to fire on American citizens that aren't Muslims
5304
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:18:15 PM »
Paul said before the vote on Thursday, according to The Hill, “It is irresponsible and dangerous to continue to put America further into debt even for something we need.” “We need national defense, but we should pay for it,” Paul added.
“America does not project power from bankruptcy court,” Paul said.
Hey Paul, talk's great, but if your shit doesn't get passed because it cuts too deeply, then you're not helping anyone. This is more pointless political maneuvering.
Can we fucking post in Serious without sounding like a 14 year old on /pol/?
It's funny because I literally copied this thread from /pol/
I know.
nigga why are you on /pol/
5305
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:14:40 PM »
Can we fucking post in Serious without sounding like a 14 year old on /pol/?
It's funny because I literally copied this thread from /pol/
5306
« on: March 26, 2015, 07:06:42 PM »
 http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-trolled-the-hell-out-of-cruz-and-rubio-on-the-defense-budget/>typical republicans sending blank checks to the pentagon >both cruz and rubio sign on to increase the defense spending by a gorillian dollars >golf claps , praise jesus ronald reagan >implying they're not the same person >rand paul introduces a spending bill >increases military spending exactly as much cruz and rubio >except in paul's bill , he cuts the everliving fuck out of government and pays for every dime. >cruz and rubio now have to explain how they are fiscal conservatives when they are sending blank checks to the pentagon while paul "the isolationist" is paying for said checks tldr its ogre if rand's PR team handles this right
5307
« on: March 26, 2015, 05:42:40 PM »
He considers Russia a bastion of morality in spite of the fact that men stand outside metro exits handing out catalogs of prostitutes.
This is dumb. Russia definitely has its problems in terms of morality, but prostitution is not one of them.
This is more in reference to the Vatnik's ideals of morality and Orthodoxy Christianity, than a comment on the moral status of prostitution. At least, that was my understanding. This is also in a country where prostitution is illegal, and I do consider participating in prostitution where it is illegal to be immoral. Not because it's a crime, but because they have no laws to protect them, and no fair market to improve conditions through competition, so there is most likely abuse involved.
5308
« on: March 26, 2015, 05:41:21 PM »
I can't even argue about this anymore. We're both just parroting things that have already been said. You're thinking about this in the wrong light, and making waaaaaay too many generalizations. The simple fact of the matter is that you have, yes, a right to do whatever the hell you want to your own body. Why so many people on this forum and in this world have such a strong aversion to this basic fact is beyond me.
So, yeah, not going to stress myself out anymore today by getting constantly reminded that people like you exist.
Generalizations? It's nothing but the facts on my end, as opposed to your conjecture.
Sorry, but no. It's wrong and we don't need that shit normalized in our society.
>moralfaggotry to the point that you would dictate what men and women can do with their genitals 
5309
« on: March 26, 2015, 04:18:03 PM »
Spoiler Abortion - Aggressively undecided
Affirmative Action - totally against
Animal Rights - vehemently neutral
Barack Obama - somewhat against
Border Fence - fucking hilarious
Capitalism - steadfastly for
Civil Unions - moderately against (state involvement in personal partnerships is overreach)
Death Penality - aggressively undecided
Drug Legalisation - strongly for
Electoral College - somewhat forr
Environmental Protection - strongly for
Estate or Inheritance Tax - strongly against
European Union - totally against
Euthanasia - somewhat for
Federal Reserve or Central Bank - totally uninformed
Flat Tax - taxation is immoral
Free Trade - somewhat undecided
Gay Marriage - state involvement in marriage is massive overreach
Global Warming is caused by humans - strongly for
Globalisation - strongly for
Gold Standard - strongly against
Gun Rights - unrepentantly for
Homeschooling - for (with standards)
Internet Censorship - strongly against
2003 Iraq War - undecided
Labour Unions - undecided
Legalised Prostitution - strongly for
Medicare and Medicaid - moderately against
Medical Marijuana - strongly for
Military Intervention - undecided
Minimum Wage - against
National Health Care - strongly against
National Sales Tax - undecided
Occupy Movement - stoned communists
Progressive Tax - undecided
Racial Profiling - strongly against
Redistribution of Wealth - completely immoral
Smoking Ban - strongly against
Socialism - violently against
Stimulus Spending - strongly against
Term Limits - moderately for
Torture - strongly against
United Nations - strongly against
War in Afghanistan - moderately against
War on Terror - strongly undecided
Welfare - somewhat against
5310
« on: March 26, 2015, 12:51:50 PM »
The reason it was made (to combat oppressive governments) has never been invoked a single time in the history of the US. That must mean it can never happen.
Even if it were to happen, it's not like civilians have the firepower to stand up to the US military. Good luck using your handy shotgun against tanks, helicopters, and drones.
>what are defections >what is sabotage >how are illiterate Afghan goatherds with rusted AKs and Lee-Enfields costing the US government billions of dollars
Pages: 1 ... 175176177 178179 ... 256
|
Show Posts
