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.
No, you're ignoring my questions because answering them would show your contradicting beliefs. Normally I dont get upset over it but you're blatantly ignoring what I asked and trying to switch the subject.
I'll answer your question anyway. They would be taken care of by their friends, family, community, or whoever wanted to help. That means they need to maintain good relationships with others or face the consequences of nobody being willing to help. Other alternatives could be starting a fundraiser/kickstarter/indiegogo type of thing to ask for donations. No, it isn't a 100% guarantee and it shouldn't be. If you can't get people to help, you can't run to someone with a gun to force them to do it.
Lets take the example of an abused child. Who will help that child? Clearly not the family as they are the ones abusing them, and a young child is not in a position to make and maintain good relationships with people outside the family. Is it just bad luck for them?
So in other words those who lost their families, the elderly, single mothers and orphaned and/or abused children would have noone to go to? Wow. Is this really what you're proposing? Is that supposed to be moral?
I have a hard time deciding if you guys are so naive that you believe "the help from friends and families" is all that is needed to help children, women, the disabled and sick or you're just right wingers in disguise and simply believe that worrying about the faith of the weak is not worth your time. Again, there is nothing moral about the system that doesn't care about its children, elderly, disabled and sick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E
They would be taken care of by their friends, family, community, or whoever wanted to help. That means they need to maintain good relationships with others or face the consequences of nobody being willing to help. Other alternatives could be starting a fundraiser/kickstarter/indiegogo type of thing to ask for donations. No, it isn't a 100% guarantee and it shouldn't be. If you can't get people to help, you can't run to someone with a gun to force them to do it.
So in other words those who lost their families, the elderly, single mothers and orphaned and/or abused children would have noone to go to? Wow. Is this really what you're proposing? Is that supposed to be moral?
I have a hard time deciding if you guys are so naive that you believe "the help from friends and families" is all that is needed to help children, women, the disabled and sick or you're just right wingers in disguise and simply believe that worrying about the faith of the weak is not worth your time. Again, there is nothing moral about the system that doesn't care about its children, elderly, disabled and sick.
Private, voluntary charity already helps millions. No force or coercion required. You are not forced, nor is anyone else, to give to my parish, and yet our parish does all manner of charitable work with kids, elderly, sick, etc. You are not forced to give to Catholic Charities, Baptist Ministries or any other religious charity organizations, yet they are all over the world, helping the sick, the elderly and the children.
So how are these many charitable organizations doing these things if nobody is forced by government to support them? How is it that given the amount of my taxes are used for traditional welfare like you refer to, my wife and I still voluntarily give me more than that to private charities each year?
Just because you seem to not understand voluntary charity does not mean it doesn't exist.
Private, voluntary charity already helps millions. No force or coercion required. You are not forced, nor is anyone else, to give to my parish, and yet our parish does all manner of charitable work with kids, elderly, sick, etc. You are not forced to give to Catholic Charities, Baptist Ministries or any other religious charity organizations, yet they are all over the world, helping the sick, the elderly and the children.
So I was right, your utopia does not have a plan how to take care of the elderly, disabled, single mothers, orphaned children so on. Do you think this is moral? You offering us a vision where the elderly or disabled go from door to door simply asking for food and money? Are you guys naive or simply "right-wingers in disguise" who believe that worrying about the weak is not worth your time???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
So how are these many charitable organizations doing these things if nobody is forced by government to support them? How is it that given the amount of my taxes are used for traditional welfare like you refer to, my wife and I still voluntarily give me more than that to private charities each year? Just because you seem to not understand voluntary charity does not mean it doesn't exist.
They're not doing at all as private charities have not nearly the capacity to help all those in need, all the elderly, single mothers, orphaned kids and so on. That's exactly why the government had to step in.
i think it's important to remember that anarchists aren't looking for a perfect world where everyones needs and wants are met. they simply want to be left alone.
i think it's important to remember that anarchists aren't looking for a perfect world where everyones needs and wants are met. they simply want to be left alone.
That's what I just figured, but then why do they bother living amongst us and taking advantage of what our society can offer like safety, law or the "internet"?
Last edited by random_thoughts; 09-24-2014 at 10:48 AM..
That's what I just figured, but then why do they bother living amongst us and taking advantage of what our society can offer like safety, law or the internet?
there has been a number of attempts to set up anarchist enclaves/intentional communities around the world. none have been successful to my knowledge.
So I was right, your utopia does not have a plan how to take care of the elderly, disabled, single mothers, orphaned children so on. Do you think this is moral? You offering us a vision where the elderly or disabled go from door to door simply asking for food and money? Are you guys naive or simply "right-wingers in disguise" who believe that worrying about the weak is not worth your time???
I am not offering a plan for a utopia. I said that voluntary charity does exist, it does help all the different examples in your appeal to sympathy, and does it without government initiating force against anyone. I am arguing that people can be and are nice, helpful, and supportive without a gun being stuck in their face.
Feel free to keep believing that only via government force and skimming 85% off the top for their own wallets can we possibly help those in need. I will never agree, but I am not blind either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by random_thoughts
They're not doing at all as private charities have not nearly the capacity to help all those in need, all the elderly, single mothers, orphaned kids and so on. That's exactly why the government had to step in.
The government did not have to step in, it chose to. Long before the Great Depression (exacerbated in duration and intensity by both Hoover's protectionism and FDR's New Deal), the federal government had been trying to "help" people outside their Constitutionally enumerated boundaries. Madison, Jefferson, and plenty of others argued against federal "charity" as it is not an enumerated function. But giving things to people makes them like you, and politicians have a) a bottomless wallet and b) really want people to like them.
Regardless, forced "charity" at the end of the centurion's spear is just of the many motivators of counter-economics. If you feel it works for you to have the government forcibly redistributing your wealth, then good for you, o serve your master and do so with gusto. I do not agree with it, and do what I am legally capable of doing to reduce how much Leviathan antagonizes me. In the meantime, I'll keep being voluntarily charitable in my local area, without your approval, agreement or participation, tyvm.
I am not offering a plan for a utopia. I said that voluntary charity does exist, it does help all the different examples in your appeal to sympathy, and does it without government initiating force against anyone. I am arguing that people can be and are nice, helpful, and supportive without a gun being stuck in their face.
You dont have to argue this point, we all know people can be sympathetic but there is no way private charities could take care of all those in need. Not enough capacity. This I know for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
Feel free to keep believing that only via government force and skimming 85% off the top for their own wallets can we possibly help those in need. I will never agree, but I am not blind either.
I am not arguing the government is not skimming 85% but simply point out that NOBODY ELSE wants to take care of people in need. Private charities, churches simply don't have the capacity to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
Regardless, forced "charity" at the end of the centurion's spear is just of the many motivators of counter-economics. If you feel it works for you to have the government forcibly redistributing your wealth, then good for you, o serve your master and do so with gusto. I do not agree with it, and do what I am legally capable of doing to reduce how much Leviathan antagonizes me. In the meantime, I'll keep being voluntarily charitable in my local area, without your approval, agreement or participation, tyvm.
What's the alternative? Let the people in need starve to death? No private institution has the resources to help all those in need.
I am appalled to realize that anarchist utopia does not offer any solution to the problem of taking care of the elderly, orphaned, disabled or sick. They would probably have to walk door to door begging for food. Nice alternative. Thank you, but no thank you.
Last edited by random_thoughts; 09-24-2014 at 11:11 AM..
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.
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.
