Get rid of the laws and let the humans run wild!

Post Reply New Topic

It's a democratic process being used to appoint people to jobs, so yes maybe it is- government itself isn't a bad thing.. it's our government that is.

If you had no money you would holdout too- i've actually seen some of these people on properties when working on a site like that.. they don't look happy. So build them a resort, tell them the food there is free and the rent is paid!
You think we can't make this work, because you are still pitting people against people for resources.


But the point is, why can't they be happy?? It should be one's own choice to be miserable- every opportunity for happiness should be provided.

Ok, so why no natural rights?

We all think babies are fragile and need protecting- why not the same for the right to happiness? Engrain it in there next to breathing!

Bitcoins are a decentralized digital currency, its created through proof of work problems, in the whole world there will only be 21 million bitcoins in existence right now there is 10 million roughly, but we wont reach 21 million until 2145CE roughly. Every 4 years the number of bitcoins produced in the block chain is cut in half, and you can divide it up to 8 spots past the decimal so 0.00000001 is the smallest amount you can have at the moment the smallest are centibits and millibits 0.1 amd 0.01 go to Mt. Gox they are a bank i guess you could say for bitcoins and have the latest value of it, its a very volatile currency changin values a lot, i have personally see it jump from $5-$10 then back to $5 in a matter of seconds, its created by mining blocks, basically the registry for transactions but its all anonymous, you know a transaction happened but you dont know where it happened or what it happened for. On Tor we use bitcoins primarily, especially on the Silk Road, because of its anonymity, this is the money of the future. It has no scam protection, YOU have 100% control over your bitcoins, it sacrificed scam protection for actual ownership of money. Its all really about trust, you need to trust the guy not to rip you off. Its like gold in the fact that it has value because we feel it does.

That pretty much sums up how utterly absurd and ill thought out the notion of this thread is.
In the 1960's & 1970's every form of anarcho-this-that-or-the-other was tried and they all failed catastrophically.
They were called communes back then.

The glaring problem that emerged in the communes is that some way of making group decisions need to be found.

Most turned to democratic structures, some (usually the religious ones) authoritarian ones.
What could be more ideal than everyone coming together, exchanging ideas and forming a consensus or majority about group decisions?

In practice, these decision making sessions over the simplest things fell to pieces, in the small groups one person would swiftly attract a couple of people that would offer unquestioning support to them and then that person would control the rest by picking on the weakest member of the group or relentlessly attacking any person that was seen a threat to his authority. The decision making process descended into a way for the alpha male to cement his authority and privilege lacking any of the checks and balances found in a mature society with a written rule of law. Overtime the alpha male would give himself and his cronies more and more privilege at the expense of the others and eventually the group collapses and ceased to exist or a revolt happened, the alpha male was ejected only for a new alpha male to take his place and start the process again.

In the large groups, factions would quickly form and the sessions turned into ever more bitter wars of words, the groups would splinter and divide and then as the the divisions got to large for one group to stand the sight of another, a group would leave to found a new commune. The hemorrhaging of people disillusioned by the infighting and the loss of groups of people collapsed the large communes into smaller ones where the process in the first scenario took hold.

A few communes did struggle on, but they all failed to be self sustaining and went down one of two paths. Path one they revert to capitalism and become a luxury retreat for the wealthy or path two they develop a parasitical relationship (often criminal) with the larger nation they are a part of.

not entirely true,

plenty of communes live and well in denmark, one of them even had the beatles in it for a summer.
there are even places where the government allows them to coexist as a seperate society within our society (a legal trick for explaining why they do not have these and that responsibility but why they then have others instead)

You and your nazi fascination.
Shame on you

Not really, in fact not at all.

The vast majority of 'communes' in Denmark are not communes the are co-habs.

In a Danish co-hab the limits of community are that people have a mortgage, go to work as normal in the wider capitalist society to pay that mortgage, obey all the same laws as the rest of society but they may have a community laundry room, shared heating system instead of individual boilers in each house and they might have a requirement to cook in the communal kitchen once a month although most people will prepare their own food in their own kitchen and eat with their own family on most nights.

That is a million miles away from what the OP is suggesting.

For the more hardcore approach in Denmark, this news article demonstrates quite nicely what is left of them:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 00,00.html


See my point, about the parasitic relationship?

You had an Waffen SS skull on your avatar but u changed it to captain America when someone called u out on it. Whatever, I'm not going to argue about it,

No, the pirate flag was changed today at the request of a moderator.
Simply calling me out on anything won't get you much.........

Well that's a different matter. We all have critiques of the way government currently is. I doubt there is a person alive who doesn't.



Oh now we're building them palaces and stuffing them to the gills and just giving them everything they want.

That'll bring road construction costs back to some tolerable level ... oh wait ...



Why natural rights? What's natural about rights? They don't exist in nature. Where's the proof there is any such thing, outside of their establishment in law?

Just wanting these things and thinking they'd be sensible to have, doesn't mean they actually exist cosmically or anything. They need to be made to exist - and this is one of the functions of law.

Pirate flag:

http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/image ... te-fla.jpg

Waffen SS logo:

http://cdn100.iofferphoto.com/img/item/ ... bdYsGa.jpg

They do look similar but there are clearly distinct details which are different, and clearly distinguish between the two. Yours was a Waffen SS symbol.

No, the pirates in these waters use that one that looks just like der SS Totenkopf.
We get a lot of German pirates around here, though, so maybe that explains it.
The long and short of it is that the avatar in question has been replaced at the request of a moderator.
Is that good enough or do you really need another page or three of going-nowhere "debate"?

There is no debate. It's just a fact. I'm guessing the silliness about German pirates with Waffen SS flags in your waters is ... well I don't know what it is. I'm sure it's not a serious attempt at denial.

Maybe you made an honest mistake, who knows. We don't need to go over for 3 pages, no. You can just accept fact anytime you like.

Last edited by edgewaters on 28 Jun 2012, 10:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You are ridiculous!

You think it's some kind of pampering? No. The road is scheduled to be rerouted in 2016, and these people need to be moved, so apartment buildings are constructed in that time and the people are relocated from their dumpy old homes.. what's the problem here?

The idea of someone else being spoiled while you don't get what they get is GONE. Got it? This is a whole new outlook on the situation- a better one. People can focus on better things now that we aren't all stuck in that mindset.


Nothing is natural about rights- people aren't natural anymore!! You want natural people you need to go find one in the jungle and pray he doesn't bite you.

They can be made to exist on common sense alone- you don't burn yourself because that's just not helpful! So it should be for the pursuit of happiness in life.

"They don't exist in nature" Is not a valid reason we can't accept them into our system of values! The right to bear arms certainly didn't come from nature- and yet... it is INGRAINED. Try taking an american's gun away.

They are proud of it- and rightly so.

Oh, right. Allow me to be more realistic then.

Let's get rid of government and the rain will turn to gold and everyone will have everything they want! YAY! Once we get rid of the laws, nobody will be mean or bully anyone. Double yay!



Yes but it was never inalienable, it was merely asserted - by constitutional law, and by armed force. And it's because it's enshrined in constitutional law, that it's ingrained in the culture. It was never "self-evident" or "God-given."

Ugh. You completely ignore all the explanations is what I mean.. sorry but it's hard to reply to new topics every other post! I prefer to flesh out the ideas on the table before moving on..

Ok you want it simplified? Give them the things they need to stay alive, then restructure the governmental system. Then get rid of the laws.


And I still maintain that people can learn to adopt a concept without writing it on a yellow legal pad. Bypass the middleman.

Well, we have to deal with what you've already asserted, we can't just bypass it and run willy-nilly off to explore Magic Funland.

Law and rights were a pretty critical concept to your argument, is the foundation here valid? Let's have a look, before we rush off to construct new ideas on what may be a faulty foundation.



It's not learning that's the problem. People can understand that it's bad to murder others, and still do it. At the end of the day, there has to be disincentives.