[Tim] That seems... too simplistic of a solution. If we transitioned from this world to instant anarchy there would be complete chaos. I don't see how any transition to anarchy could end without chaos.
[Jay Hailey] @Tim - most of the chaos and violence of a transition to anarchy is premised on the idea that a sizable proportion of people would behave violently unless there was the force of law to deter them.
Most people feel this way - so most of the violence of a sudden transition to Anarchy would be from people trying to identify and elminate these "Stupid... See More/Violent Others"
However - this fear of our neighbors and community members is... just that. It's prejudice - it's one of those things that "everyone knows" without having good evidence for.
It's also a major tool for oppression - people put up with totaliatarianism and oppression because they're afraid of what would happen without it.
Anarchy as a political philsoophy is not about not having laws - it's about having laws and social orders that we agree to of our own free will. I don't want to wind up with an S&M biker gang burning down my home any more than anyone else does.
"But... THAT'S anarchy!"
Nope. That's the Fear. That's the Imaginary Picture that keeps you in the corral, and not running free.
There will never be a suddden transition to anarchy except by disaster. History shows that when people are thrown into anarchy, instead of using the tools appropriate to anarchy - Respect for each other, negotation and presuasion - people rebuild a state. They want the security it provides.
So the transition to Anarchy will be a slow evolution of what "Everyone knows" - because in this case, like when people thought the world was flat - what "Everyone knows" is just dead wrong.
People use the state as a tool to try and achieve security. When deprived of it, they make one up.
What I fear is disaster and social trauma - history shows that cultures under stress geek for dictators and totalitarians - they want security HARDER, and some lunatic shows up to give it to 'em.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
I have been pursuing medical care at the maximum
rate the system allows - dead, dead slow.
Wheel of Diagnosis turn, turn, turn, tell which entry in the DSM III that we should learn.
The opinion is leaning towards Borderline
Personality Disorder, for the summer.
In other news I have a blog
again and I have been playing facebook
a lot.
I briefly decided trying to retire from politics/philosophy/current events.
This is due to having rampaging asshole attacks while discussing them
As I write this I just antagonized anti-war activist and heroine Cindy
Sheehan by having a poorly formatted opinion.
I was miserable and felt like I had just cut loose a huge part of me in order
to try and satisfy everyone.
So I decided to go ahead an have opinions and look at my favorite websites
and listen to my favorite podcasts, I just wouldn't discuss them with anyone.
I am working on that.
I am working on getting diagnostics and treatment for my Adenoids
- I am hoping for an Adenoidectomy.
I am also working on getting treatment for my deviated
septum, hopfefully a septoplasty
will fix things.
If this works, and has a positive benefit on my Obstructive
Sleep Apnea, then my goal is to get a class
A CDL and head out over the road.
I hope that I can ... make some progress. I'll keep you updated.
-*-
What I am working on. This varies. The problem is this - Over the last 15 months
I have been wrestling with bad depression.
(As opposed to good depression?) I mean occasionally suicidal depression, and
often the really bleak stuff where life is a hopeless death march to oblivion.
One of the symptoms of a bout of depression is that whatever I am working on
at the time looks shallow, retarded and like a total waste of time. "There
is no way any one sane is interested in [Foo]."
When I recover from the episode (As much as I ever do these days), what
I was working on still retains that mental image of being retarded bullcrap.
The only way I know if a project is valid or is really retarded bullcrap is
when I get outside feed back.
So, if something I was doing worked for you, please let me know. It all looks
like brain damaged crap to me, right now. I could be wrong. Way wrong. But I'll
never know it by myself.
Please keep in touch and we'll see you next time.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The Genobino crime family has announced that they have an offshore cache of cruise missles. Unless the United States deposes Obama and changes it government, they will start attacking military targets, and causing civilian deaths in major cities.
because the Obama administration is a terrorist organization, New York City is declared to be under blockade. No one can enter or leave without Giving Big Louie and his Machine gun toting thugs the secret sign.
-*-
So why is this an astounding crime spree when the Genobino Crime Fanily does it to the U.S. but Okay when the U.S. does it for 20 years to Iraq?
because the Obama administration is a terrorist organization, New York City is declared to be under blockade. No one can enter or leave without Giving Big Louie and his Machine gun toting thugs the secret sign.
-*-
So why is this an astounding crime spree when the Genobino Crime Fanily does it to the U.S. but Okay when the U.S. does it for 20 years to Iraq?
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
I visited the home of friends in-laws today. they had Fox news on. It was a steady drumbeat of fear mongering, and a call to military action. I didn't really understand how bad Fox has gotten.
I didn't really think that people would by the idiotic propaganda about Iran having nukes and missiles (They have no nukes and won't for a long, long time, and they have no missiles that could reach us and they won't for a long, long time.)
There are no terrorists under your bed or in your community. There is no boogie man overseas who could possibly threaten the United States.
It's propaganda. It's all lies. Does anyone really believe all that crap? Is anyone really that scared?
Don't be afraid. don't trust anyone who makes mass money reading a teleprompter on TeeVee
Don't be afraid. Don't trust anyone who makes mass money reading a teleprompter on TeeVee. It's all lies. Iran isn't going to nuke anyone. There are no terrorists under your bed or in your community. The Biggest threat to Liberty are the people waving the biggest flags and telling you not to think.
Our lives are filled with deception and lies - but we don't have to buy the lie. We can wake up and see the truth.
Jay ~Meow!~
I didn't really think that people would by the idiotic propaganda about Iran having nukes and missiles (They have no nukes and won't for a long, long time, and they have no missiles that could reach us and they won't for a long, long time.)
There are no terrorists under your bed or in your community. There is no boogie man overseas who could possibly threaten the United States.
It's propaganda. It's all lies. Does anyone really believe all that crap? Is anyone really that scared?
Don't be afraid. don't trust anyone who makes mass money reading a teleprompter on TeeVee
Don't be afraid. Don't trust anyone who makes mass money reading a teleprompter on TeeVee. It's all lies. Iran isn't going to nuke anyone. There are no terrorists under your bed or in your community. The Biggest threat to Liberty are the people waving the biggest flags and telling you not to think.
Our lives are filled with deception and lies - but we don't have to buy the lie. We can wake up and see the truth.
Jay ~Meow!~
Sunday, April 4, 2010
I like Michael Franti's work
So I am cruising Youtubes listening to music videos.
I discover two things
Michael Franti and Spearhead - Say Hey (I love you)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoaTl7IcFs8
A cute and catchy pop song
But wait, What's that below it?
Michael Franti Hey world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADPz6XsJCqA
Ooo, that's socially conscious...
Michael Franti Bomb the World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICL-4Onk0PA
"Tell me the reason for the colors that you fly"
Time to go home
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSeuLsNV4CA
Zowie
Ooo, wait, what's that link?
The Disposable Heroes Of Hiphoprisy - Hipocracy is the greatest luxury
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87Q3igXYZY
Michael Franti is behind "The Disposable Heroes Of Hiphoprisy" Holy crap!
They did "Television the drug of the nation" way back when!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgOWTM5R2DA
I discover that I like Michael Ranti more than I thought and I have done so for longer than I thought.
Jay ~Meow!~
I discover two things
Michael Franti and Spearhead - Say Hey (I love you)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoaTl7IcFs8
A cute and catchy pop song
But wait, What's that below it?
Michael Franti Hey world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADPz6XsJCqA
Ooo, that's socially conscious...
Michael Franti Bomb the World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICL-4Onk0PA
"Tell me the reason for the colors that you fly"
Time to go home
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSeuLsNV4CA
Zowie
Ooo, wait, what's that link?
The Disposable Heroes Of Hiphoprisy - Hipocracy is the greatest luxury
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87Q3igXYZY
Michael Franti is behind "The Disposable Heroes Of Hiphoprisy" Holy crap!
They did "Television the drug of the nation" way back when!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgOWTM5R2DA
I discover that I like Michael Ranti more than I thought and I have done so for longer than I thought.
Jay ~Meow!~
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Why I Still Am a Voluntaryist
BrainPolice2 has a video called "Why I am not a voluntaaryist"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUYw-s1XsUE
In it, I feel he makes the fallacy of the undistributed Middle -
If I am a voluntaryist, I take the use of coercive force off the table. So if Mr. Mann has a piece of property and wants to set up "The White's Only Diner" - excluding non-white people from his business, I will not use coercion or force to stop him from doing so.
That does NOT mean I approve of such behavior. That does NOT mean I find it "acceptable". It means that as a matter of my own ethical foundation, I eschew coercion or force, so I may not use those means to oppose him.
That leaves advocation, persuasion, ridicule, verbal abuse and certain forms of economic opposition and competition as tools I have to oppose Mister Mann and his racist, retarded business.
Just because I will not use coercion or force to oppose voluntary interactions between free individuals, that doesn't automatically mean I approve of annything they do.
I haven't listened to the responses or video responses to Brainpolice2's statement. Betcha it comes up and he covers the concepts more clearly than I do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUYw-s1XsUE
In it, I feel he makes the fallacy of the undistributed Middle -
If I am a voluntaryist, I take the use of coercive force off the table. So if Mr. Mann has a piece of property and wants to set up "The White's Only Diner" - excluding non-white people from his business, I will not use coercion or force to stop him from doing so.
That does NOT mean I approve of such behavior. That does NOT mean I find it "acceptable". It means that as a matter of my own ethical foundation, I eschew coercion or force, so I may not use those means to oppose him.
That leaves advocation, persuasion, ridicule, verbal abuse and certain forms of economic opposition and competition as tools I have to oppose Mister Mann and his racist, retarded business.
Just because I will not use coercion or force to oppose voluntary interactions between free individuals, that doesn't automatically mean I approve of annything they do.
I haven't listened to the responses or video responses to Brainpolice2's statement. Betcha it comes up and he covers the concepts more clearly than I do.
Human motivations and the NAP
Just a quick hit here - A follow up to an earlier post about the non-agression principle.
I am listening to Gary Chartier's videos at C4SS "Introduction to Anarchy"
http://c4ss.org/content/2025
In lecture 1c we're kicking off with the source book's description of human motivations. The Tannehills derive their theory of human liberty and self ownership from being alive.
Chartier goes into other human movtivations. "A Sense of Wonder", a need to conect with other human beings, an so on.
I'd reached a similar conclusion to the Tannehills myself without realizing it. I said "Don't kill me," is essentially a universal human value.
That idea was shot down by Dennnis Washburn who pointed out that some people do want to be killed. There was even a case where a man sold his body to another person on E-Bay, in order for the buyer to eat it.
Now, in Physics, if there's so much as a single exception to your theory, it means your theory is incomplete, or flat out wrong. When the apple falls up into the sky, it means your whole "gravity" idea goes into the garbage and you start over.
I don't think you can hold human behavior to that sort of all-or-nothing standard, because humans are very complex critters. There are more interconnections in the neurons of your brain than there are Stars in the Milky Way Galaxy - that means simulating your mind is more complicated than simulating 400 billion stars, planets and what-not all elese orbiting each other.
Looked at that way, the exceptions aren't surprising. The fact that we're so similar in mind set is absolutely stunning.
-*-
I think that the sense of wonder is of a different CLASS of human thought, emotion and action than "Don't commit aggression"
"Don't Commit Aggression" is a negative right - it defines something YOU have, by defining an action I might take as wrong. You have a right to remain intact, unmolested, unassaulted and so-on. You belong to you. Our language is set up so that "Don't Commit Aggression." is an easier formmulation of that idea.
That idea is a fundamental restriction on my actions. That idea is the foundation of millions of specific cases and development.
Your sense of wonder is not capable of violating any of my ownership of me. If your sense of wonder motivates you to aggress against me (Hard to imagine) then the sense of wonder is not the primary driver - your sense of wonder informs your desires, your desires frame a goal - and if that goal is across my boundaries - then you must decide. Will you agress to acquire your goal?
Maybe if I owned mountain top property, and you trespassed to get to a good place for viewing with a telescope...
See the sense of wonder cannot trespass - your awareness that your goal is blocked by my rights puts you in the position to chose or eschew agression.
(BTW, if I ever do get mountain top property with good astronomy viewing, talk to me. I'm not a dick. Maybe, if you and your astronomy club are willing, we can flatten out a space and put a BBQ there, make it a more comfortable place)
-*-
My point is this, there's the aggression/no-aggression point of choice - and then there's EVERYTHING else.
All other human motivations and experiences are. IMHO, of a different class of thing.
So if discussing ethical behavior - "Don't Commit Aggression" becomes the root. "Because no one wants to be killed, beaten or ganked." is the motivation behind that root.
Nothing else needs to be there.
If I tell you a funnny story for free, it's beccause You are amused by the story, and I enjoy having an audience. We are making an exchange outside of money or the calulation of marginal utility.
"Don't commit aggression" does NOT limit all human behavior to a economic calculations. It simply sets a bar, a limit at one end of human interaction. That still leaves about anything else we can invent as reasons for and products of our interactions.
I am listening to Gary Chartier's videos at C4SS "Introduction to Anarchy"
http://c4ss.org/content/2025
In lecture 1c we're kicking off with the source book's description of human motivations. The Tannehills derive their theory of human liberty and self ownership from being alive.
Chartier goes into other human movtivations. "A Sense of Wonder", a need to conect with other human beings, an so on.
I'd reached a similar conclusion to the Tannehills myself without realizing it. I said "Don't kill me," is essentially a universal human value.
That idea was shot down by Dennnis Washburn who pointed out that some people do want to be killed. There was even a case where a man sold his body to another person on E-Bay, in order for the buyer to eat it.
Now, in Physics, if there's so much as a single exception to your theory, it means your theory is incomplete, or flat out wrong. When the apple falls up into the sky, it means your whole "gravity" idea goes into the garbage and you start over.
I don't think you can hold human behavior to that sort of all-or-nothing standard, because humans are very complex critters. There are more interconnections in the neurons of your brain than there are Stars in the Milky Way Galaxy - that means simulating your mind is more complicated than simulating 400 billion stars, planets and what-not all elese orbiting each other.
Looked at that way, the exceptions aren't surprising. The fact that we're so similar in mind set is absolutely stunning.
-*-
I think that the sense of wonder is of a different CLASS of human thought, emotion and action than "Don't commit aggression"
"Don't Commit Aggression" is a negative right - it defines something YOU have, by defining an action I might take as wrong. You have a right to remain intact, unmolested, unassaulted and so-on. You belong to you. Our language is set up so that "Don't Commit Aggression." is an easier formmulation of that idea.
That idea is a fundamental restriction on my actions. That idea is the foundation of millions of specific cases and development.
Your sense of wonder is not capable of violating any of my ownership of me. If your sense of wonder motivates you to aggress against me (Hard to imagine) then the sense of wonder is not the primary driver - your sense of wonder informs your desires, your desires frame a goal - and if that goal is across my boundaries - then you must decide. Will you agress to acquire your goal?
Maybe if I owned mountain top property, and you trespassed to get to a good place for viewing with a telescope...
See the sense of wonder cannot trespass - your awareness that your goal is blocked by my rights puts you in the position to chose or eschew agression.
(BTW, if I ever do get mountain top property with good astronomy viewing, talk to me. I'm not a dick. Maybe, if you and your astronomy club are willing, we can flatten out a space and put a BBQ there, make it a more comfortable place)
-*-
My point is this, there's the aggression/no-aggression point of choice - and then there's EVERYTHING else.
All other human motivations and experiences are. IMHO, of a different class of thing.
So if discussing ethical behavior - "Don't Commit Aggression" becomes the root. "Because no one wants to be killed, beaten or ganked." is the motivation behind that root.
Nothing else needs to be there.
If I tell you a funnny story for free, it's beccause You are amused by the story, and I enjoy having an audience. We are making an exchange outside of money or the calulation of marginal utility.
"Don't commit aggression" does NOT limit all human behavior to a economic calculations. It simply sets a bar, a limit at one end of human interaction. That still leaves about anything else we can invent as reasons for and products of our interactions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)