Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system! To begin posting Login or Sign Up.
August 01, 2014, 11:55:11 AM
Search:     Advanced search
189378 Posts in 9985 Topics by 17963 Members
Latest Member: rajapara
Home Help Search Login Register
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.  (Read 3466 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #15 on: February 02, 2014, 05:16:15 PM »

This is a tough one for a state hater.
The hate comes from the state evoking hate by overstepping natural boundaries.

A state wholly within its natural boundaries would likely evoke love.

It is not the idea of the state that ought to be judged harshly,
but rather the actions of certain states which step out where their founders wish was that they never go.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 05:29:53 PM by ReasonableVoice »
Logged

alaric89

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1843
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #16 on: February 02, 2014, 05:32:58 PM »

This is a tough one for a state hater.
The hate comes from the state evoking hate by overstepping natural boundaries.

A state wholly within its natural boundaries would likely evoke love.

It is not the idea of the state that ought to be judged harshly,
but rather the actions of certain states which step out where their founders wish was that they never go.


That is the funniest thing I have read for a long time. In a way it is perfect. Can someone make a meme with Reasonable Voice's brilliant post on that famous hippy girl with dreadlocks? Or maybe Yoda if he fell to the darkside.

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2014, 06:58:19 PM »

A state wholly within its natural boundaries would likely evoke love.
That is the funniest thing I have read for a long time.
Truth is funnier than fiction :-0)
Logged

dalebert

  • Blasphemor
  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6514
    • View Profile
    • Flaming Freedom
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #18 on: February 03, 2014, 12:50:06 AM »

Corporations are people. Queue up a slight variation of the classic line from Soylent Green...

"It's made of people!"

That said, the frightening history of corporations is a history of a government-created monstrosity. Government absolved the decision-makers and shareholders of a ridiculous amount of responsibility. They gave them rights and took away responsibility. Those two things go together. No shocker disaster ensued.

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #19 on: February 03, 2014, 11:15:14 AM »

Corporations are people. Queue up a slight variation of the classic line from Soylent Green...

"It's made of people!"
I accept that corporations can be made up(in part) of humans (and addressed that in the two part response) .

Do accept that society-wide application of "NAP governance (freedom/responsibility)"
necessarily requires a balancing aspect between individuals and groups ?

And if so . . .
Do you accept that I have NOT mostly incorrectly thrown around the term NAP ?

Logged

dalebert

  • Blasphemor
  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6514
    • View Profile
    • Flaming Freedom
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2014, 01:30:02 PM »

Do accept that society-wide application of "NAP governance (freedom/responsibility)"
necessarily requires a balancing aspect between individuals and groups?

This is begging the question since I don't believe in society-wide application of what you're calling "NAP governance". That's the case you're trying to make, isn't it? The point of this thread.

Even so, I don't even understand the distinction you're trying to make between individuals and groups. If a group of frat boys votes to gang-rape a girl who's passed out on a pool table then the individuals who actually rape her are violating the NAP. The guys who continue to associate with a group that is clearly corrupt for even believing such a vote should be taken seriously in the first place are partly responsible even if they didn't join in. They're demonstrating some degree of advocacy for the aggression. Guys who immediately quit the frat and openly state that they don't approve of such a vote are not responsible for aggression. If the fraternity members want to redeem their organization in the eyes of the public, it would be in their best interest to demonstrate that they hold the individual members responsible in some way and at the very least disassociate from them by kicking them out of the fraternity, maybe more. That's my take on it. A group of people coordinating in an act obviously makes resolving such things more complicated but at no point does each individual stop being responsible for their choices.

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2014, 02:09:02 PM »

I don't even understand the distinction you're trying to make between individuals and groups. If a group of frat boys votes to gang-rape a girl who's passed out on a pool table then the individuals who actually rape her are violating the NAP.
That frat/rape example is only looking at one overt situation involving an "open(known to some high degree)" group.

Many corporations make covert decisions resulting in aggression WITHOUT everyone in the corporation being aware of such decisions or being aware of the aggression.

Example:
Certain heads on the board of EXXON hire construction workers to build a pipeline from a building out into the ocean. Years later, other certain heads of the board hire truckers to transport waste oil and pour it into a holding tank in that building - which drains to the ocean.

Situations like that is where a distinction between an individual and a group(corporation/organization/gang/etc) is necessarily required for NAP as applied to a group.

Understand ?

This is not the only difference but it is sufficient to show there must be a distinction.


I don't believe in society-wide application of what you're calling "NAP governance".

Regardless of your not believing in a society-wide application of what I'm calling "NAP governance" . . .

Do you accept that society-wide application of "NAP governance (freedom/responsibility)"
necessarily requires a balancing aspect between individuals and groups?



what you're calling "NAP governance"'
Do you see anything in  what I've called "NAP governance" that is not in keeping with NAP ?
If so, please identify whatever is not in keeping with NAP.

« Last Edit: February 03, 2014, 02:14:03 PM by ReasonableVoice »
Logged

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2014, 02:20:01 PM »

FOLLOW-UP
I don't even understand the distinction you're trying to make between individuals and groups.


Is there anything in particular within this previous post that you have a question about
regarding distinction between individuals and groups ?

Quote from: ReasonableVoice

Part of the responsibility of governance under NAP includes protection of the society at large.
Large organizations(or corporations) have been historically dangerous as evidenced by the times in which we currently live.

So that part of implementing NAP necessarily is placed into a balancing area . . .
balancing rights of an individual against the rights of a group.
This is one of the few balancing areas required within a NAP society.

Pollution is one example threat --
Pollution is a normal part of existence, but large corporations are known to pollute more than an individual or small group, etc.

I am not saying that ALL corporations would be taxed either,
just that it is justified to tax corporations which may pose substantial threats to society or communities within the society.

Regulating large corporations enough to keep the threat in check and prepare for providing remedy for damage caused - not significantly more than that.

If a corporation builds a nuclear device and it might detonate wiping out the entire corporation and many in society as well, a NAP governance should be designed to prevent(before) and remedy(after a threat becomes a reality)


And for large corporations that pose no threat and provide great benefit to the society at large,
"perhaps"(in limited circumstances) provide assistance.
Logged

dalebert

  • Blasphemor
  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6514
    • View Profile
    • Flaming Freedom
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2014, 10:38:27 PM »

Many corporations make covert decisions resulting in aggression WITHOUT everyone in the corporation being aware of such decisions or being aware of the aggression.

Example:
Certain heads on the board of EXXON hire construction workers to build a pipeline from a building out into the ocean. Years later, other certain heads of the board hire truckers to transport waste oil and pour it into a holding tank in that building - which drains to the ocean.

The corporation can't make decisions. The individuals on the board made the decisions. They're the individuals responsible. The investors handed over scads of money and trusted those leaders to handle their money well so trusting those leaders was a risk they were willing to take. It's their problem if the corp gets sued or is subjected to defensive violence or whatever due to the actions of their leaders and they lose their investments.

Quote
Do you accept that society-wide application of "NAP governance (freedom/responsibility)"
necessarily requires a balancing aspect between individuals and groups?

Repeating that over and over is not making whatever your point is any clearer, so I still don't even know what you're asking me to accept.

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2014, 11:03:49 PM »

Many corporations make covert decisions resulting in aggression WITHOUT everyone in the corporation being aware of such decisions or being aware of the aggression.

Example:
Certain heads on the board of EXXON hire construction workers to build a pipeline from a building out into the ocean. Years later, other certain heads of the board hire truckers to transport waste oil and pour it into a holding tank in that building - which drains to the ocean.
The corporation can't make decisions. The individuals on the board made the decisions. They're the individuals responsible.
This is incorrect   . . .  or "mostly incorrect" :-0)

Corporations CAN make decisions and do make decisions,
just not in the natural individual human manner.

Not only do corporations make decisions, their decision process can be such that no one can find out who had input to the decisions(who was present to vote, etc), let alone what their part was (vote yes?, no?, abstain?) Corporations can even make decisions by secret ballot.

Gangs, Frats, Organizations, etc. can also operate in such manner.

A "corporation" is NOT a natural person; hence, there is necessarily a distinction
between groups and individuals.

I can see how not understanding this would lead to difficulty answering the other questions  I posed, so let's please stay on this point until we reach a common understanding.

Please let me know if you still think groups(such as corporations) are not distinctly different from individual natural persons(humans).

And if you do believe they are the same, please address the information above.

Logged

dalebert

  • Blasphemor
  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6514
    • View Profile
    • Flaming Freedom
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2014, 11:06:55 PM »

Corporations CAN make decisions and do make decisions,

Uh... nope. Only individuals have brains and it takes a brain to make a decision. I'm sorry. I just don't know how to take that statement as anything but completely absurd.

Quote
Not only do corporations make decisions, their decision process can be such that no one can find out who had input to the decisions(who was present to vote, etc), let alone what their part was (vote yes?, no?, abstain?) Corporations can even make decisions by secret ballot.

Okay, but I don't see it as particularly relevant to your point. Most crimes are committed secretively for obvious reasons, whether by an individual or individuals who coordinate to commit some crime. It sucks, but that's just a problem with solving crimes in general.

EDIT: I will say this much. If the board puts a decision up to a vote, the vote itself is usually public. Regardless of how individual shareholders vote, the shareholders know what was voted on. If the board is even putting up for a vote an act that violates the NAP, they're ALREADY responsible. They're just using the vote as a justification for rights violations, much like governments do. And if shareholders continue to support the corporation, they're responsible as well. That's their chance to pull their support from the organization, and they should or else be held responsible.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2014, 11:16:42 PM by dalebert »
Logged

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #26 on: February 03, 2014, 11:11:56 PM »

Corporations CAN make decisions and do make decisions,
Uh... nope. Only individuals have brains and it takes a brain to make a decision.
 I'm sorry. I just don't know how to take that statement as anything but completely absurd.

Saying nope without addressing the information I provided which shows the contrary is simply an unsupported "nope".

A "SHARED" decision is NOT an individual brain function.
An individual brain CANNOT make a SHARED decision.



Logged

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #27 on: February 03, 2014, 11:21:58 PM »

CATCHING UP after your EDIT . . .

Okay, but I don't see it as particularly relevant to your point. Most crimes are committed secretively for obvious reasons, whether by an individual or individuals who coordinate to commit some crime. It sucks, but that's just a problem with solving crimes in general.

Not sure what your Okay is referring to at this point.

But as for relevant . . . it is completely relevant to the point.
The corporation (regardless of natural persons who may be part of the corporation) is liable for any crimes, harm, etc. done by the decisions of the corporation.

To allow the "corporation" to be immune from liability (as you seem to suggest) would
mean anyone wishing to commit harm could simply create a corporation to do the harm and then the natural person would have immunity.

Logged

ReasonableVoice

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #28 on: February 03, 2014, 11:31:08 PM »

PS It is true that some actual natural persons who were part of the corporation may never be caught - but restitution would still be available for harm by holding the corporation liable for the SHARED decisions.

And that might prompt others in the corporation to HELP find those rascals :-0)

Logged

dalebert

  • Blasphemor
  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6514
    • View Profile
    • Flaming Freedom
Re: Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« Reply #29 on: February 03, 2014, 11:38:15 PM »

Okay, this feels rather silly, but I will attempt to break it down for you what's happening when a group of people appears to be making decisions. In fact, a bunch of individuals who are each responsible for their choices is making a decision in a group dynamic.

An individual posts a craigslist ad to form a club at her college and posts a time and place for the first meeting.

A bunch of individuals decide whether to show up or not. Ten people decide to show up. They all agree that the organizer should lead since she took the initiative to form the group and is willing.

The "leader" proposes some things they should work on and proposes "dues" that each member should pay. She then proposes a vote.

One individual walks out because he doesn't want to pay dues.

Nine individuals agree to vote on dues.

A number is voted on and five of the nine agree, a simple majority. The presumption of most present is that a simple majority will conclude the vote. The "leader" declares the number valid.

One individual says it's not valid and he won't pay because he assumed it would take at least a 2/3 majority if not a unanimous decision for a newly-formed club. He gets up and walks out.

The rest individually conclude the vote is valid and agree to pay.

They then get two volunteers to act as enforcers. They individually agree to this task. The "leader" issues a command to the enforcers to go extract the dues from the other member, by force if necessary. The "leader" has decided that force is justified because the member agreed to the vote before hand.

Another member is outraged at this decision and leaves, refusing to pay the dues.

The "leader" extends the command to use force on the other member who left.

One of the new enforcers resigns and refuses to follow the order, and individual decision. The other individual decides to obey and commences to threaten the other members.

The vote was just a justification mechanism for decisions that individuals made like to issue an order for violence or to obey the order to commit violence. At no point did a group actually make a decision because that's impossible. In fact, the group is an abstraction at best. There are just a bunch of individuals cooperating and making individual decisions. A school of fish might look like one organism, but it is actually a bunch of individual fish responding to the movements (choices) of the fish around them, each one choosing to remain in proximity to the rest and to make their decisions dependent on the decisions of the others. People are a lot more complicated, obviously, but it's the same idea.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
 

Page created in 0.25 seconds with 19 queries.

Free Talk Live Image
Free Talk Live Image
proXPN
Be your own bank
Free Talk Live Image
Free Talk Live Image
Watch the Ridley Report
Liberty Stickers
Mark Warden - New Hampshire Realtor
Math Gate
Midas Resources
Amazon
Buzzbox Coffee
freedomcam.net
Quantum Vibe from Bighead Press
DoorDevil.com
Free Talk Live Image
Free State Project
Free Talk Live Image
Advertise Market Promote with AMP
Free Keene - NH Liberty Activism
shiny badges
Join the Shire Society
Freedom's Phoenix
iHeartRadio
stitcher smartradio
talk stream live
FTL on AudioNow
bitcoin not bombs
Liberty on the Rocks