Question about this theory

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

manlymatt83

Lifer
Oct 14, 2005
10,051
44
91
So one of my co-workers and I went drinking tonight. He explained his opinion on a bunch of things, and I want to know how accurate the idea is. He basically said that the human race is completely messed up because of things that happened 200+ years ago, and there's no going back. The only way that we could go back is if we slowly phase out government entirely. Meaning absolutely no government whatsoever - the people run themselves. Everyone would own a gun, or if they didn't, they just need to be careful about the situations they put themselves into. Murderers would be gunned down by other people affected by their actions. There would be no taxes. Currency would be in gold. Roads would be privatized, and if there were tolls, it would be because the company running them used that to make money. Large companies would grow larger, until they were a monopoly, and then someone new would come in and compete, and the cycle would restart.

Does this make any sense whatsoever? Would something like this work?
 
M

Mr. Pedantic

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2010
5,027
0
76
So who would pay for the things that are currently provided by the government? And how would they get the money? Tolls? Tithes? Blackmail? What about the justice system? We rely on it not only for punishment of criminals, but also identifying who are the criminals in the first place.

Large companies would grow larger, until they were a monopoly, and then someone new would come in and compete, and the cycle would restart.
Click to expand...
Who? Any smart monopoly could easily make it so that if it weren't for government intervention no other company ever got a look in. Bribery, blackmail, physical force, assassination, etc.

Roads would be privatized, and if there were tolls, it would be because the company running them used that to make money.
Click to expand...
How would you stop them from putting tolls everywhere and making a killing?
 
JohnOfSheffield

JohnOfSheffield

Lifer
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
manlymatt83 said:
So one of my co-workers and I went drinking tonight. He explained his opinion on a bunch of things, and I want to know how accurate the idea is. He basically said that the human race is completely messed up because of things that happened 200+ years ago, and there's no going back. The only way that we could go back is if we slowly phase out government entirely. Meaning absolutely no government whatsoever - the people run themselves. Everyone would own a gun, or if they didn't, they just need to be careful about the situations they put themselves into. Murderers would be gunned down by other people affected by their actions. There would be no taxes. Currency would be in gold. Roads would be privatized, and if there were tolls, it would be because the company running them used that to make money. Large companies would grow larger, until they were a monopoly, and then someone new would come in and compete, and the cycle would restart.

Does this make any sense whatsoever? Would something like this work?
Click to expand...

The guy with the biggest monopoly would have the most men working for him, most men, most guns.

Besides, have you witnessed the posts on this forum? You want to give people like FearMyPocket a gun?

Tell your freind that he's not all that bright and he should keep his ideas to himself before he starts a sect.
 
JohnOfSheffield

JohnOfSheffield

Lifer
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Truth is, all prosperous societies are a variation of a mixed economy, you can SAY that the US is more capitalistic than say Sweden, but it's not really true, socialism has to do with regulations on the free market and the US has a sheitload of it. Most people think it has to do with taxation, it somewhat does but not alone and in the case of the US, not even close to alone.

Corporatism, which is what he is talking about is a warped form of the communist ideal and no, no monopoly owner will ever give up power, why should he? you got a 45? He can afford to keep an army complete with an attack chopper.

That is what fucks with my mind when it comes to the second in the us Con. Sure, you can own an itty bitty gun, if the sheit hits the fan the army will be on the governmnents side and your handguns won't do sheit, not even full autos would do much, OR the army would be on your side in which case you wouldn't need your plinkers.

It was drawn up at a time when very simple handguns were state of the art weapoins, today it's not even relevant, if you were following the dev of state of the art then nukes would be ok to buy at Wal Mart.

I'm going to bed now, in three hours i'm going on watch here in Afghanistan and here a plinker DOES matter.
 
Zorkorist

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,861
3
76
Sleep tight, John, and yes the 2nd, the right to keep and bear arms, is kinda made pbsolete by the arms the Governemnt keeps.

'Tis a problem.

-John
 
Dissipate

Dissipate

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2004
6,815
0
0
manlymatt83 said:
So one of my co-workers and I went drinking tonight. He explained his opinion on a bunch of things, and I want to know how accurate the idea is. He basically said that the human race is completely messed up because of things that happened 200+ years ago, and there's no going back. The only way that we could go back is if we slowly phase out government entirely. Meaning absolutely no government whatsoever - the people run themselves. Everyone would own a gun, or if they didn't, they just need to be careful about the situations they put themselves into. Murderers would be gunned down by other people affected by their actions. There would be no taxes. Currency would be in gold. Roads would be privatized, and if there were tolls, it would be because the company running them used that to make money. Large companies would grow larger, until they were a monopoly, and then someone new would come in and compete, and the cycle would restart.

Does this make any sense whatsoever? Would something like this work?
Click to expand...


If he thinks that the human race is messed up because of things that happened just 200+ years ago he is an idiot. Sorry.
 
StageLeft

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I think your friend probably makes for a fun drunk but hopefully he doesn't vote. None of what he said is even compatible. For example most of us if we were put in a place without any government would immediately without any pause whatsoever form one. It is simply what smart people do when they are together. It is natural for any social species, be it ant (social...?) or human to create a hierarchical order with rules. Only artificially could that be kept away. It's never happened in human history when you have more than one person. Even Somalia with its "lack of government" has many similarities of governments, there are groups that exert control and have relationships with those around them. A person cannot live without some structure like that, not naturally.
 
F

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
JohnOfSheffield said:
The guy with the biggest monopoly would have the most men working for him, most men, most guns.

Besides, have you witnessed the posts on this forum? You want to give people like FearMyPocket a gun?

Tell your freind that he's not all that bright and he should keep his ideas to himself before he starts a sect.
Click to expand...

Dude.. why aren't you responding to my friends request on facebook? :'(

BTW.. The U.S. government has cleared me to purchase weapons and the State of Florida has given me a license to do it concealed!
 
Murloc

Murloc

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2008
5,382
65
91
that can't work.

People with similar sights would just go to other people, and threaten them with guns 10vs1. They would ask him to give them the gun.
Repeat.
In the end they will get control and estabilish a dictatorial government.
 
D

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
manlymatt83 said:
So one of my co-workers and I went drinking tonight. He explained his opinion on a bunch of things, and I want to know how accurate the idea is. He basically said that the human race is completely messed up because of things that happened 200+ years ago, and there's no going back. The only way that we could go back is if we slowly phase out government entirely. Meaning absolutely no government whatsoever - the people run themselves. Everyone would own a gun, or if they didn't, they just need to be careful about the situations they put themselves into. Murderers would be gunned down by other people affected by their actions. There would be no taxes. Currency would be in gold. Roads would be privatized, and if there were tolls, it would be because the company running them used that to make money. Large companies would grow larger, until they were a monopoly, and then someone new would come in and compete, and the cycle would restart.

Does this make any sense whatsoever? Would something like this work?
Click to expand...

No Taxes? What was in those drinks???
 
C

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Murloc said:
that can't work.

People with similar sights would just go to other people, and threaten them with guns 10vs1. They would ask him to give them the gun.
Repeat.
In the end they will get control and estabilish a dictatorial government.
Click to expand...

You're new - and you're right. Well done.

This falls under 'learn from history'.

History is largely made of just such things. Individuals are subject to the group of 10 who dominate them by force. So people organize.

If people organize into peaceful communities, they are subject to the domination of a group of militants who organize. If they form into a militia, you get competitions of militias.

Early stages are miltias going after one another; the more advanced the larger the groups in conflict.

Look at early civilizatoins - warlords in England fighting to multiple 'kings' of group/tribes fighting to the eventual unification - and then to the conflict of nations.

Same with Rome, local conflicts leading to unification leading to empire. Same with Germany, same with France, same with, well, pretty much any society.

Same with China and Japan, eventually uniting from warlords to the Shogun/Emperor for the latter.

And once the nations are there - they battle. Civilizations battle, when the crusades were useful, one group of nations attacked another. They sailed to the Americas and attacked there.

And wherever they went, went subjugation. The less lucky were those like Columbus' victims - over 90% of the the people killed within two or three decades of millions.

Watch the documentary on Liberia - massive killings under street thug warlords who would organize groups, and the groups would just subjugate the people and attack each other.

These things lead to 'strongmen' who unite and dominate - tyrrany.

We really need civics and history classes - the lack of them has led to the 'tea party' types who are a mob who are blindly angry for the demand of anarchy.

They unwittingly fight democracy, by hating it instead of the flaws to fix, and given their way would bring tyranny wherever they go, the only possible outcome from defeating democracy.
 
M

Matthiasa

Diamond Member
May 4, 2009
5,755
23
81
So hes advocating anarchy?
Most of those ideas are logically flawed, as already pointed out.
 
Lemon law

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
We had European governments like our OP described, it called feudalism aka the dark ages.
Of course no one needed tax supported roads because no one was able to travel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom