Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3847716 -

You can post all of the studies you want.

You still have not described what you mean by "True Freedom".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3847724 -

Quote:
What did you mean by "True Freedom"?


Freedom to do anything that doesn't harm others. Acts that harm society as a whole (harming the environment etc) should be taxed at a rate that is exactly equal (as accurately as possible) to the social cost.

Quote:
You are advocating a world-wide socialist government (which would never work) and communal anarchist societies (which would never work). When you mix together two things which don't work, you get something that definately won't work.



This is always said. You don't know this at all. May I remind you one more time, however, that it would require a totally different global political and social climate. When I brought up the topic of borders I wanted to establish that a) they are immoral and b) they are the main reason that the free-market doesn't promote worldwide equality. The system I have proposed is, like my ethics, merely a "best-guess", or my current favourite for best way to live as a society. It is the lack of borders which is the feature I am certain about.

Without borders labour costs (wages) would be far more equal throughout the world. There would be much greater equality of income. There would be no inneficiencies frm tariffs, quotas or subsidies. It would require a fresh start, because it would be greatly to the detriment of rich countries if there were some in place at the time. This, along with patents, is why the free-market doesn't generally make everyone better off.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3847728 -

Quote:
You can post all of the studies you want.

You still have not described what you mean by "True Freedom"


I posted that before I read your post, it was in response to you claiming that there was no link between freedom and violence.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3847766 -

Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian


--------------------
"Whatever you do, you need to keep moving.  Because when you stop moving you die (physically and emotionally).

Good luck and blessings of happiness and fortune." ~ RandalFlagg RIP


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3847845 -


What did you mean by "True Freedom"?



Freedom to do anything that doesn't harm others.

And who decides what constitutes harm and what doesn't? Who decides how to balance certain behaviors and certain conflicting interests? A world-wide government that is completely removed from local situations? A homogenous bloated bureacracy that rules over the world like a sinister blob? Am I supposed to give up my freedom and sovereignty to something like that? Fuck that.


You are advocating a world-wide socialist government (which would never work) and communal anarchist societies (which would never work). When you mix together two things which don't work, you get something that definately won't work.



This is always said. You don't know this at all.

All attempts at communism have resulted in horrific dictatorships. Large scale anarchism has never been attempted. I doubt if it could be implemented or if it would work for any amount of time.

How telling is it that the world already has an international body (the U.N.) that imposes rules, condemnations, and regulations that a lot of countries don't even listen to at all? So far, attempts to legislate the world as a whole under one body have failed miserably.


May I remind you one more time, however, that it would require a totally different global political and social climate.

Yes it would. And how the hell do you think it is possible that an accommodating climate would arise?


When I brought up the topic of borders I wanted to establish that a) they are immoral

You can think whatever you want. But that doesn't change the fact that borders exist, they always have existed, and they will probably always exist.


b) they are the main reason that the free-market doesn't promote worldwide equality.

Disparity of resources and technology in different areas is the big reason why there is not worldwide equality. Can you expect a primitive tribe living in the desert to have as much wealth as a group of people who have embraced modern technology and who live in an area with abundant resources?

And weren't you advocating worldwide socialism? That would not be a free-market...


The system I have proposed is, like my ethics, merely a "best-guess",

It is a pipe dream. No offense.


Without borders labour costs (wages) would be far more equal throughout the world.

People would still look differently, speak differently, think differently, and be different. With differences comes disparity in lifestyles.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #3847899 -


Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian

Every daring attempt to make a great change in the human condition has resulted in the ignorance of reality and the imposition of ideals upon other people by force. These people who seek to implement utopias can only do so if they ruthlessly control human beings.

The world that deafpanda and you seem to be advocating is not one that I would want to live in. Would you force me to take part? Would you force people to give up their social, cultural, and national identities? Would you enforce a ubiquitous and mandatory altruism which would result in oppression and mediocrity? Would you take people's wealth that they have created? Would you stifle everything that Man is in order to build what you view to be a better world?

If I was faced with a situation like that, I would fight back. I would rather die than live in an ideologically driven, poisoned, and perverted world.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3847909 -


I posted that before I read your post, it was in response to you claiming that there was no link between freedom and violence.

I never said that. Maybe you misunderstood my arguments.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3847916 -

Quote:
And who decides what constitutes harm and what doesn't? Who decides how to balance certain behaviors and certain conflicting interests? A world-wide government that is completely removed from local situations? A homogenous bloated bureacracy that rules over the world like a sinister blob? Am I supposed to give up my freedom and sovereignty to something like that? Fuck that.


It is not that hard, really. Just legalise everything that is a "victimless crime" (abortion, drugs, euthnasia...). The government would be FAR smaller than they are at the moment. No big social programs or anything.

Quote:
All attempts at communism have resulted in horrific dictatorships.


I'm not talking about communism. Communism is authoritarian. This would not be at all.

Quote:
Large scale anarchism has never been attempted. I doubt if it could be implemented or if it would work for any amount of time.


It's not really large scale anarchism at all either. It is, if you like, a constitutionally limited anarchy?.

Quote:
Yes it would. And how the hell do you think it is possible that an accommodating climate would arise?


I have said innumerable times that I don't know if such a climate could arise. I have said that perhaps a horrible catastrophe or global economic collapse might do it.

Quote:
You can think whatever you want. But that doesn't change the fact that borders exist, they always have existed, and they will probably always exist.


The fact that something exists does not make it moral. What is your point?

Quote:
And weren't you advocating worldwide socialism? That would not be a free-market...


"Socialism"? I am advocating a market free of government intervention save for limited taxation to provide a police force and disability benefits - IMO the bare necessities of government. That cannot be said to be socialism, really.

Quote:
It is a pipe dream. No offense.


Of course it is. You seem to think that if I was in power I would do this. I certainly wouldn't because there is no way it could work with the world as it is.

Quote:
ople would still look differently, speak differently, think differently, and be different. With differences comes disparity in lifestyles.


So? I haven't denied this. I am saying that economic parity would be far, far greater. With economic parity comes social stability.

Edited by deafpanda (02/28/05 07:01 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3847983 -


It is not that hard, really. Just legalise everything that is a "victimless crime" (abortion, drugs, euthnasia...). The government would be FAR smaller than they are at the moment. No big social programs or anything.

And what about people who have objections to abortion, drugs, and euthanasia? What about people who want things run differently? A "one size fits all" cookie cutter government would not be able to impose even standards throughout a world full of diverse people.


All attempts at communism have resulted in horrific dictatorships.


I'm not talking about communism. Communism is authoritarian. This would not be at all.

Communism in practise is authoritarian. In theory, its end result is somewhat similar to what you are advocating. It preached that the government would melt away and a world of self-sufficient communities full of equality and peace would magically be able to exist forever.


The fact that something exists does not make it moral. What is your point?

The fact that something is moral or immoral does not affect that it exists.


You seem to think that if I was in power I would do this. I certainly wouldn't because there is no way it could work with the world as it is.

Thank God you see that.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3848025 -

RandalFlagg said:

Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian

Every daring attempt to make a great change in the human condition has resulted in the ignorance of reality and the imposition of ideals upon other people by force. These people who seek to implement utopias can only do so if they ruthlessly control human beings.

The world that deafpanda and you seem to be advocating is not one that I would want to live in. Would you force me to take part? Would you force people to give up their social, cultural, and national identities? Would you enforce a ubiquitous and mandatory altruism which would result in oppression and mediocrity? Would you take people's wealth that they have created? Would you stifle everything that Man is in order to build what you view to be a better world?

If I was faced with a situation like that, I would fight back. I would rather die than live in an ideologically driven, poisoned, and perverted world.


No, you'd have the freedom to do what ever you want to do. Why's that such a bad thing? Ya square.


--------------------
"Whatever you do, you need to keep moving.  Because when you stop moving you die (physically and emotionally).

Good luck and blessings of happiness and fortune." ~ RandalFlagg RIP


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #3848047 -


No, you'd have the freedom to do what ever you want to do. Why's that such a bad thing?

If Man is given too much freedom he will run amok. I give this theoretical society about a week before it fell apart.


Ya square.

Hey! I resemble that remark.

Edited by RandalFlagg (02/28/05 07:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3848125 -

Don't diss it til yav tried it!


--------------------
"Whatever you do, you need to keep moving.  Because when you stop moving you die (physically and emotionally).

Good luck and blessings of happiness and fortune." ~ RandalFlagg RIP


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #3848151 -

Tell you what...maybe I'll become a part of your theoretical society if you send me a pic of you.

:wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3848297 -

I agree...

but such a thing is 100% pipe dream. There will be borders, and opposing groups, as long as Humans are Human. Everyone is different, even if some slightly, and these differences will breed conflict. There will be separate countries on Earth, at least until we start to settle other worlds. Once we get setlled on a few other planets, we will start opposing them as well.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: deafpanda]
    #3848488 -

deafpanda said:
I think borders are morally unjustifiable. It should be a right of everyone to go anywhere they want on this earth. I do recognise, however, that this could never be implemented in today's society.

I also think that borders grossly distort the free-market. If there were no borders, there would be far greater equality in income throughout the world, and little to no government intervention and aid would be needed. I would be perfectly happy with an almost totally libertarian system if there were no borders.

This is why I totally shun patriotism, it is another example of inter-group discrimination, something that arises wherever we create groups (different football teams, political ideologies, races, countries). We have no greater legitimate claim to the country in which we live than anyone else.

Who disagrees?


The minute there is totally free markets I will support totally open borders. I'm not holding my breath or lighting any candles.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: zappaisgod]
    #3849002 -

zappaisgod said:
The minute there is totally free markets I will support totally open borders. I'm not holding my breath or lighting any candles.


I agree. If our government wasn't constantly ripping open the taxpayers' blouse and offering free wet nursing to whomever wants to suckle, open borders would be acceptable. It is wise to order priorities by which we proceed with changing government operations towards more freedom and more personal responsibility.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Borders [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #3849113 -

That's something I never really thought of..but I think you're right. I think everyone knows that it is not at all plausible but..interesting thought just the same


--------------------
I Refuse To Say I'm Lost Just Because I Don't Know Where I Am

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Is worldwide Capitalism impossible?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 Phred 6,459 80 07/15/03 06:18 AM
by hongomon
* Declaration of Cease Fire (online worldwide petition) 3eyes 646 9 12/09/04 12:10 AM
by endokrin
* Worldwide Power Outages
( 1 2 3 all )		 catalyst777 2,182 40 10/02/03 05:11 PM
by wingnutx
* 'Minutemen' to Patrol Arizona Border RandalFlagg 1,302 14 02/26/05 01:24 AM
by Prosgeopax
* Porous Mexican Border as a Terrorist Entry Point
( 1 2 all )		 Autonomous 4,303 36 01/05/04 01:19 PM
by Xlea321
* Governor T-1 on border closing SoopaX 1,135 9 04/30/05 06:12 PM
by SoopaX
* Insanities south of Canada's border
( 1 2 3 all )		 Toricious 1,911 50 01/05/05 06:21 PM
by lonestar2004
* Why Bush doesn't give a damn about the border RandalFlagg 580 4 03/13/05 10:43 AM
by Baby_Hitler

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,990 topic views. 2 members, 6 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.04 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 17 queries.