Thomas Sowell appreciation thread
Options
Comments
-
I thought that desertrain's Chinese community-"African American community" analogy was pretty insightful and partially valid. As long as the analogy is taken as loose and mostly figurative.High Revolutionary wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »No shots but you have to do more research desertrain. And I'm not saying that because you disagree with me.
Lol. Just tryna figure out how u can be for anarcho capitalism when it requires the very thing u supposedly oppose: centralized authority
How would this profit driven free soceity be achieved?
But it doesn't require centralized authority; communism requires centralized authority.
If you're going to criticize it criticize it for relevant reasons. When you get a chance read over this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
I read parts of that wikipedia page, and I must admit that it's an interesting philosophy, but imho you've either got to be crazy, naive, and/or truly unconventional to want this. I don't necessarily think that it's impossible for an anarcho-capitalistic "state" to exist and it seems that many indeed have existed throughout history, but I still think that it would be incredibly unlikely (though not necessarily difficult) for one to exist today.
For this reason, anarcho-capitalism to me seems more like a philosophy or a mindset rather than a political system. So are you really about that life, or do you enjoy government every now and then? Where does one even go to live in order to "practice" anarcho-capitalism? Texas (for Americans)? Switzerland (for non-Americans)?
I personally think that existence of "governments" in any and every setting is inevitable (which is why I and many others find anarchy so ironic). I also think that governments are neccessary "evils." I honestly think that if an anarcho-capitalistic "state" were to exist (and by definition, it would be entirely composed of "volunteers"), human nature would prove too powerful, and said state would give way to crime, exploitation, oppression, vigilance, etc. -
High Revolutionary wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »No shots but you have to do more research desertrain. And I'm not saying that because you disagree with me.
Lol. Just tryna figure out how u can be for anarcho capitalism when it requires the very thing u supposedly oppose: centralized authority
How would this profit driven free soceity be achieved?
But it doesn't require centralized authority; communism requires centralized authority.
If you're going to criticize it criticize it for relevant reasons. When you get a chance read over this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
Capitalism requires some form of currency....shame on me for questioning how such a "system" could be implemented without some centralized authority to regulate the value of said currency...right? Lol
Dont say gold. Because it has no inherent value. Not to mention ur population could never exceed the gold u have. And fiat currency has to be regulated ....
And how silly of me to question why would not one but large amounts of people that it takes to run a factory or join a security force let alone man a labor force voluntarily work for slave wages only to make someone else wealthy....when they could just join a commune and easily work for themselves and make more?
Lol. Yea... ur inability to provide me with any plausable answers is because im ignorant and biased...and not because you failed to do ur research....right
Again silly me
-
I thought that desertrain's Chinese community-"African American community" analogy was pretty insightful and partially valid. As long as the analogy is taken as loose and mostly figurative.High Revolutionary wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »No shots but you have to do more research desertrain. And I'm not saying that because you disagree with me.
Lol. Just tryna figure out how u can be for anarcho capitalism when it requires the very thing u supposedly oppose: centralized authority
How would this profit driven free soceity be achieved?
But it doesn't require centralized authority; communism requires centralized authority.
If you're going to criticize it criticize it for relevant reasons. When you get a chance read over this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
I read parts of that wikipedia page, and I must admit that it's an interesting philosophy, but imho you've either got to be crazy, naive, and/or truly unconventional to want this. I don't necessarily think that it's impossible for an anarcho-capitalistic "state" to exist and it seems that many indeed have existed throughout history, but I still think that it would be incredibly unlikely (though not necessarily difficult) for one to exist today.
For this reason, anarcho-capitalism to me seems more like a philosophy or a mindset rather than a political system. So are you really about that life, or do you enjoy government every now and then? Where does one even go to live in order to "practice" anarcho-capitalism? Texas (for Americans)? Switzerland (for non-Americans)?
I personally think that existence of "governments" in any and every setting is inevitable (which is why I and many others find anarchy so ironic). I also think that governments are neccessary "evils." I honestly think that if an anarcho-capitalistic "state" were to exist (and by definition, it would be entirely composed of "volunteers"), human nature would prove too powerful, and said state would give way to crime, exploitation, oppression, vigilance, etc.
nothing but talk on highrevolutionarys part...
I know its cool to be antigovernment nowadays...but lets get real...
and really if anarcho capitalists followed anarichist means the end result would be anarchy . not what anyone today would call capitalism...
-
I thought that desertrain's Chinese community-"African American community" analogy was pretty insightful and partially valid. As long as the analogy is taken as loose and mostly figurative.High Revolutionary wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »No shots but you have to do more research desertrain. And I'm not saying that because you disagree with me.
Lol. Just tryna figure out how u can be for anarcho capitalism when it requires the very thing u supposedly oppose: centralized authority
How would this profit driven free soceity be achieved?
But it doesn't require centralized authority; communism requires centralized authority.
If you're going to criticize it criticize it for relevant reasons. When you get a chance read over this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
I read parts of that wikipedia page, and I must admit that it's an interesting philosophy, but imho you've either got to be crazy, naive, and/or truly unconventional to want this. I don't necessarily think that it's impossible for an anarcho-capitalistic "state" to exist and it seems that many indeed have existed throughout history, but I still think that it would be incredibly unlikely (though not necessarily difficult) for one to exist today.
For this reason, anarcho-capitalism to me seems more like a philosophy or a mindset rather than a political system. So are you really about that life, or do you enjoy government every now and then? Where does one even go to live in order to "practice" anarcho-capitalism? Texas (for Americans)? Switzerland (for non-Americans)?
I personally think that existence of "governments" in any and every setting is inevitable (which is why I and many others find anarchy so ironic). I also think that governments are neccessary "evils." I honestly think that if an anarcho-capitalistic "state" were to exist (and by definition, it would be entirely composed of "volunteers"), human nature would prove too powerful, and said state would give way to crime, exploitation, oppression, vigilance, etc.
I agree with you that it is unlikely that an anarcho-capitalistic society could exist today, but that's not a blow to the philosophy or because human beings don't have the capacity to live without the state pulling all the strings.Right now too many people are currently dependent on the government for it to be done away with. But the system will collapse eventually. All fiat based systems eventually do. I'm just hoping the people are wise enough to finally see the system for what it is.
Also I believe in order for an Anarcho-capitalistic society to take place there needs to be massive shift in people's consciousness. Rather than embracing utilitarianism people need to view things from first principles and embrace universal ethics.
Right now people are taught indoctrinated in government sponsored schools that "might equals right" and "the ends justify the means". This lays the groundwork for politicians and other authority figures to run rough shod over the people and justify it by filing it under the ends justify the means category. No one can really complain because the powers that be aren't held to any ethical standard.
As for me, I live in the US but am planning on getting a dual citizen-ship in the next few years. Where I'm not sure yet. We live in a global economy so there is no where I can really go without some type of government. Even in countries with little to no governments like Somalia there are still outside political factions influencing the region.
Like I said earlier, I'm not naive enough to believe that Anarchy is achievable in this day and age. I think it's going to have to take something real big to wake the people up.
-
Somalia is a terrible example here because Somalia is representative of a "Failed State" or one that has collapsed. States themselves usurp critical institutions so when a state fails it's not that surprising that many of the institutions that where oriented to function based on a public financing methodology rather then consumer oriented firms will also fail to exist. Institutions that are publically financed that are desperately needed like regulation of financial products or protections from various market entitles, we do not directly interface with the public form of these institutions, we influence the fate of representatives who then appoint managers. This alienates us from our regulatory instruments. Not to mention it frustrates the left because they bring skepticism of market institutions to the public but they cannot exercise that in the form of "counter-institutions" because they allow themselves to be held down by democratic methods of institutional interface rather then creating the institutions themselves.
Also what is this about gold having no inherent value. That's irrelevant. It can have contextual value based on it's properties. It is finite and difficult to counterfeit as well as it's rather liquid in the sense its' not necessarily problematic to store like a perishable.
Anyway Anarcho-capitalist and even market fundamentalists don't call for a gold standard as a panacea. Many of them call for a free market in money. Fiat money may not necessarily be a bad thing. What is bad is when you have a monopoly that controls fiat money and makes it illegal for other institutions to print money. Then only the elite get to print money. -
desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »desertrain10 wrote: »High Revolutionary wrote: »No shots but you have to do more research desertrain. And I'm not saying that because you disagree with me.
Lol. Just tryna figure out how u can be for anarcho capitalism when it requires the very thing u supposedly oppose: centralized authority
How would this profit driven free soceity be achieved?
But it doesn't require centralized authority; communism requires centralized authority.
If you're going to criticize it criticize it for relevant reasons. When you get a chance read over this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
Capitalism requires some form of currency....shame on me for questioning how such a "system" could be implemented without some centralized authority to regulate the value of said currency...right? Lol
Dont say gold. Because it has no inherent value. Not to mention ur population could never exceed the gold u have. And fiat currency has to be regulated ....
And how silly of me to question why would not one but large amounts of people that it takes to run a factory or join a security force let alone man a labor force voluntarily work for slave wages only to make someone else wealthy....when they could just join a commune and easily work for themselves and make more?
Lol. Yea... ur inability to provide me with any plausable answers is because im ignorant and biased...and not because you failed to do ur research....right
Again silly me
You didn't read the wikipedia page did you?
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaFAUeftTKs