Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anarchism is directly opposed to capitalism because the accumulation of capital requires an authoritarian state to enforce private property laws. You're confusing anarchism the political philosophy with libertarianism.
Anarchy is that there are 'no rules', but it is because none are needed. Every person has mutual respect for all other people and treats them accordingly, on their own volition. No overbearing authoritarian oversight is needed. Im a big fan af true anarchy, but it could never happen in our violent and "ME ME ME" oriented world
So what was all that early 19th century bomb throwing and assassinations?
Your premise that wars and hostility wouldn't exist without government ignores that hostilities have existed before man emerged from caves. Barbarians and nomads all had conflicts. Your premise is unfounded.
As for taxes, as FDR said, "Taxes, are the dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organized society."
And that is a crock of BULL coming from a leftist who thought government was the solution to societies ills. Until 1913, there was no income tax.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
Of course, those who don't believe in an organized society think taxes are "theft," even though they are sanctioned in the Constitution. Oh, I forgot that people who don't believe in society can't believe in a governing document of American society.
Ridiculous assertion!
Further, you are confused about the purpose of the Constitution. The Constitution is not a document intended to govern "American society." The Constitution is the law that governs Government. The Constitution establishes limits on government. Read the Constitution!
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
That is the purpose of the Constitution. Where do you find any mention of "governing society?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
If one really wants to have this debate about the merits of an organized society, one should read the works of the classical philosophers Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau and Hume.
Locke wrote that originally man was in "a state of nature," a state which did not restrain his rights at all. He had the natural right as an animal to kill someone else; rape and take what he wanted. Simply stated, the state of nature inhibited human development as it left productive people dead and deterred production since it was always at risk of bandits.
Society developed by giving up some of those natural individual rights to a government that, in return, protected property and life. As societies developed, we have government take on a greater role. Now, government protects the environment, our health and provide education among many other things. This is societal evolution but some want to return to the caves -- like Ted Kaczynski.
I think you are reading a lot into John Locke's writing that he never said. I doubt that Locke believed that primitive man "had a natural right as an animal to kill someone else; rape, and take what he wanted." This is your embellishment; your interpretation.
"Locke depicted the state of nature as a condition of peace, goodwill, mutual assistance, and preservation in which the free, 'sovereign' individual is already in possession of all valuable rights, though from a defect of 'executive power' the individual is not always able to make them good or to determine them accurately in relation to the like rights of his fellows. And from this difference flow all others. As such, society existed before all government. In this respect, Locke regarded governments creative of no rights, but as strictly fiduciary in character, and as designed to make more secure and more readily available rights which antedate it and which would survive it.
Within this state of nature, everyone possess "natural rights" to life, liberty and property. The right to life is a right of self-preservation. [The Second Amendment of the Constitution] Liberty is the right to do as one pleases with out violating the equal rights of others. The right to property derives from the right to one's labor and the fruits thereof." — John W. Whitehead, An American Dream.
[Today's Democrats (Progressives) are collectivists, and do not believe in the exclusive right to the fruits of one's labor. This was at the heart of Obama's "you didn't build that" statement, which mirrored a statement by Elizabeth Warren, D-MA.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
Taxes are not theft. They are what we pay to belong to a society. If one doesn't want to pay any taxes, go live in the wilderness, where you won't have any government protections or benefits of a society.
Excessive taxation, which is used for redistributive purposes, and not for the purposes of paying the government's bills, is theft. The Federal Government was never intended to be society's "Nanny." When we make government the guarantor of individual needs, there is no limit to what it may take from individuals in the form of taxes to pay for the gravy train of "welfare."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.