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, government is illegitimate because you can't delegate rights to the government (or anyone) that you never had to begin with, and if the government has no special exemption from the rules that apply to the rest of us, there's no reason to call it government anymore...it's the same as any private organization.
If I can't force you to pay for what I want, and No_Recess can't, and Lovehiscountry can't, and green_mariner can't, and silverkris can't...getting together and voting for residinghere2007 to "represent" us and make you pay for what we want isn't any different. That's why it's illegitimate.
You know better than this.
We're arguing that the person initiating aggression is at fault, not defensive aggression, because that's the foundation of civil behavior. We also value rational and non-hypocritical thinking, which means you have to apply that rule consistently and not make arbitrary exceptions.
Our argument is that people aren't being consistent with their own beliefs, assuming they don't believe they're personally justified in using force offensively against their neighbors.
Of course some people would NOT feel any guilt personally forcing their neighbor to do their bidding or pay for their stuff, but most of us would consider them criminals or sociopaths.
We can't win with them. Think about it: they either have to admit they are wrong (hard for any of us to do) and that the government is illegitimate or they have to admit they are ok with violence.
Remember when you had to have that talk with yourself? I wasn't too happy either. Well, part of me wasn't but then I realized I could make it right and use logic and moral consistency to navigate all situations...in my life and the events we argue about on this board.
Agreed. Let's also recognize some of the off beat illogical argumentation used, as well.
This fits their tactics, to a tee:
Some of the most amazingly idiotic things will be said by Libertarians in defense of the above ideas of "rights" and the evils of anti-discrimination law. A few of my favorites, from debates on this topic:
The "Why is a raven different from a writing desk?" question
What is it about the "lunch counter" that is different from a date? ... is it violence to be overtly racist in selecting a romantic interest? If so, how should we prevent it? If not, why not. Is it because the relationship is not primarily economical, in the narrow sense?
The "Business is a personal matter" approach
Most non-libertarians are not in favor of the American Nazi Party marching in Skokie, nor in favor of misguided marriages, or poor business investments, but very few think that this should be illegal.
The "no distinction between anything" sneer
I guess that if a fat, ugly, smelly female entered your immediate space (slobbered on top of you) and requested sexual favors, and if by some wild chance you refused, that it would be proper to take you away to a state mental health clinic and have your discriminatory ideas expunged. Is this correct?
What sort of brain-damage does it take to argue this with a straight face? Do they really, really, think someone will say "My god, a lunch counter is JUST LIKE a romantic interest. There's no way to someone could tell them apart. If a business doesn't want to serve any blacks, that's just like not having sex with someone". But apparently, this is all part of the "right of association" in Libertarianism.
Yeah, it's the line of reasoning that's the same. They're taking the non-libertarians' same exact reasoning and applying it to a different situation.
If you present a line of reasoning, you can't just apply it selectively. If I say "You're not allowed to own a dog", you ask "Why?" and I say "Because dogs aren't meant to be owned" and you ask "What about cats? Can they be owned?" and I say "What sort of brain-damage does it take to compare a dog with a cat? Yeah, it's JUST like owning a cat. "
A, I wouldn't be making any argument...just mocking you in place of an argument, and B, you're not comparing a dog and a cat. You're asking me to explain why owning a dog is wrong, but owning a cat isn't.
"You're not allowed to discriminate based on race" "Why?" "Because it's wrong, and we shouldn't let people do it" "What about discriminating based on race when you date?" "Ugh you idiot, dating and business aren't the same".
We can't win with them. Think about it: they either have to admit they are wrong (hard for any of us to do) and that the government is illegitimate or they have to admit they are ok with violence.
Remember when you had to have that talk with yourself? I wasn't too happy either. Well, part of me wasn't but then I realized I could make it right and use logic and moral consistency to navigate all situations...in my life and the events we argue about on this board.
Now I'm relieved.
Well yeah, but... it's a lot easier to just call others intellectually dishonest gaslighting sophists...
The Citizens' Council thrived because they had white backwards racist POS LE a-holes down South enforcing their agenda under the guise of "protecting and serving".
Remember the Mississippi Burning Murders? Who orchestrated that?
Who do you think is here now? These people haven't left and they haven't changed their tune. They have their power limited by federal law.
I don't identify as anything racially. I was being expeditious for the sake of continuity. I'm an individual but I suppose the government would classify me as mixed. Phenotype? I could never be mistaken as white.
In any event, I don't care about motives or what people do with their private property. I simply want to be left alone and be able to go about my own business and not have my private property rights infringed upon.
I said earlier up thread that growing up in an impoverished ghetto the two groups most likely to commit some form of aggression against me were other minorities and the government. The white man wasn't on that list.
Yet when I see people with my complexion or learn someone is a government worker I still want to respect them as an individual as I hope they will respect me. Same with white people or whoever.
I don't want to assign positive or negative traits to groups and treat them all the same based on that. It's called Collectivism and it's an abomination.
What if it's multiple restaurants doing this? Because that is what happened during the Jim Crow days. History could repeat itself.
It does not matter if you don't identify with anything. What matters is how other people perceive you based on what you look like. I could say that I'm White, but I look Black, I have African ancestry. For that reason, I will be perceived as Black and treated as such. It does not matter what I call myself. What matters in America vis a vis the dominant groups is how I look and how I am perceived.
I do care about other people's motives. I refuse to let the ways of Jim Crow and racism come back. And here is something else. I didn't grow up in an inner city ghetto. I grew up in a predominantly White suburban/rural area. Alot of the bullies I had to deal with were White. I dealt with fellow Blacks bullying me. I also dealt with White persons, particularly those of the redneck subculture and the skateboard culture, who were bullying and assaulting me.
I don't care what race anyone is. No one should be subjected to racism, ever. Bringing back the "refuse people based on race" thing will only promote racism. This is nothing to do with "property rights". If you want to be left alone, stay in your home, or go far out into the country.
No, government is illegitimate because you can't delegate rights to the government (or anyone) that you never had to begin with, and if the government has no special exemption from the rules that apply to the rest of us, there's no reason to call it government anymore...it's the same as any private organization.
If I can't force you to pay for what I want, and No_Recess can't, and Lovehiscountry can't, and green_mariner can't, and silverkris can't...getting together and voting for residinghere2007 to "represent" us and make you pay for what we want isn't any different. That's why it's illegitimate.
Without government, there is just anarchy. Alot of people would just go crazy and do whatever they want, and that would get alot of people hurt. We would see a very Darwinist way of living. Government may not be legitimate to you, but tell that to the government, and you will learn that it isn't the case. You can't have rights in a scenario of "might makes right". It takes law and order for that. It takes governments laying out what the laws are and what the purposes of those laws are for.
And something else. You might not be able to force me to pay for something. However, if I take something without paying for, remember this: Without a government dictating the laws or any law enforcement around, I could get away with stealing. With the government ruling and the courts being the levelers of our society, a thief goes to prison.
Quote:
You know better than this.
We're arguing that the person initiating aggression is at fault, not defensive aggression, because that's the foundation of civil behavior. We also value rational and non-hypocritical thinking, which means you have to apply that rule consistently and not make arbitrary exceptions.
And you obviously did not get the point. The point is this. You are defining aggression differently than other people are. And according to you, having government is some kind of aggression.
Quote:
What we're ultimately arguing is that people aren't being consistent with their own beliefs, assuming they don't believe they're personally justified in using force offensively against their neighbors.
Of course some people would NOT feel any guilt personally forcing their neighbor to do their bidding or pay for their stuff, but most of us would consider them criminals or sociopaths.
Wow, treating all people regardless of ethnicity with respect, not using race as a reason to turn someone away from buying something, if that is force, then obviously there is not a difference in opinion, but a difference in moral standards.
What if it's multiple restaurants doing this? Because that is what happened during the Jim Crow days. History could repeat itself.
Government forced restaurants to do it. You can stop with this white people are evil garbage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
It does not matter if you don't identify with anything. What matters is how other people perceive you based on what you look like. I could say that I'm White, but I look Black, I have African ancestry. For that reason, I will be perceived as Black and treated as such. It does not matter what I call myself. What matters in America vis a vis the dominant groups is how I look and how I am perceived.
I do care about other people's motives. I refuse to let the ways of Jim Crow and racism come back. And here is something else. I didn't grow up in an inner city ghetto. I grew up in a predominantly White suburban/rural area. Alot of the bullies I had to deal with were White. I dealt with fellow Blacks bullying me. I also dealt with White persons, particularly those of the redneck subculture and the skateboard culture, who were bullying and assaulting me.
By agreeing with the Civil Rights Act you're not fighting it, you are exactly like Jim Crow. Forcing your beliefs on others when no ones rights have been violated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
I don't care what race anyone is. No one should be subjected to racism, ever. Bringing back the "refuse people based on race" thing will only promote racism. This is nothing to do with "property rights".
It has everything to do with property rights. To say anything else is dishonest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
If you want to be left alone, stay in your home, or go far out into the country.
I have a better idea, why don't you and people like you move back to England and bow down to the crown since you can't stand the rights of the individual.
You don't understand rights and you have a twisted understanding of morals.
Without government, there is just anarchy. Alot of people would just go crazy and do whatever they want, and that would get alot of people hurt. We would see a very Darwinist way of living. Government may not be legitimate to you, but tell that to the government, and you will learn that it isn't the case. You can't have rights in a scenario of "might makes right". It takes law and order for that. It takes governments laying out what the laws are and what the purposes of those laws are for.
You're the only one here talking about no government so why bring it up?
Wonderful laws like Jim Crow? Like Slavery? Like not allowing women to vote? Like banning interracial and same sex marriage? Like throwing Japanese Americans in jail because they are Japanese? Like commiting genocide against the indigenous?
All of those laws and government edicts are just peachy keen right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
And something else. You might not be able to force me to pay for something. However, if I take something without paying for, remember this: Without a government dictating the laws or any law enforcement around, I could get away with stealing. With the government ruling and the courts being the levelers of our society, a thief goes to prison.
lol no you can't. You'd eventually get shot. But keep making things up if it helps you sleep at night.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
And you obviously did not get the point. The point is this. You are defining aggression differently than other people are. And according to you, having government is some kind of aggression.
Because threatening individuals when no ones rights have been violated IS aggression. You sure do like to redefine words don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
Wow, treating all people regardless of ethnicity with respect, not using race as a reason to turn someone away from buying something, if that is force, then obviously there is not a difference in opinion, but a difference in moral standards.
The force comes about when government punishes the property owner even though no ones rights have been violated. Not that you care about the truth.
Who do you think is here now? These people haven't left and they haven't changed their tune. They have their power limited by federal law.
Oh I forgot. The federal government has never passed pro-racist legislation nor has it ever engaged in nefarious covert activities to oppress minorities.
What if it's multiple restaurants doing this? Because that is what happened during the Jim Crow days. History could repeat itself.
It does not matter if you don't identify with anything. What matters is how other people perceive you based on what you look like. I could say that I'm White, but I look Black, I have African ancestry. For that reason, I will be perceived as Black and treated as such. It does not matter what I call myself. What matters in America vis a vis the dominant groups is how I look and how I am perceived.
I do care about other people's motives. I refuse to let the ways of Jim Crow and racism come back. And here is something else. I didn't grow up in an inner city ghetto. I grew up in a predominantly White suburban/rural area. Alot of the bullies I had to deal with were White. I dealt with fellow Blacks bullying me. I also dealt with White persons, particularly those of the redneck subculture and the skateboard culture, who were bullying and assaulting me.
I don't care what race anyone is. No one should be subjected to racism, ever. Bringing back the "refuse people based on race" thing will only promote racism. This is nothing to do with "property rights". If you want to be left alone, stay in your home, or go far out into the country.
You forgot: Somalia!
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.
"
