What is the purpose of a Government?

[JellyBaby]

Government should protect us from fraud, defend us from aggressors and most importantly uphold individual liberty.

MartyTheManiak, the role of government must be restricted or it will turn on its people. This has been proven time and time again over history.

People can ask government provide a framework for acheiving those goals but it shouldn't provide them itself. Why? Mainly because it will mess things up and seek to expand its rights into other areas whether or not the people want it to.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby
Government should protect us from fraud, defend us from aggressors and most importantly uphold individual liberty.

MartyTheManiak, the role of government must be restricted or it will turn on its people. This has been proven time and time again over history.

People can ask government provide a framework for acheiving those goals but it shouldn't provide them itself. Why? Mainly because it will mess things up and seek to expand its rights into other areas whether or not the people want it to.

Notice I said a gov. should do what its people want it to do.....now if it expands and does things people don't want it to do...then its no longer doing what its supposed to do.

whether or not its good to give a government lots of power is a different topic...

 

[kherman]

To protect the stupid.

Averyone elses points are valid too.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Without order, there is Chaos.

uh huh.
The reason I don't go out on a murder spree is because I'm afraid of the authorities. It has nothing to do with my own sense of survival. And for survival you know, we need to get along. It's too bad we need an authority to make us get along. There lies the entire problem.

 

[IGBT]

Fundamental organizing principal of any government is war..and lately in the US, income redistribution through liberal social programs.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: MacBaine
Without order, there is Chaos.

uh huh.
The reason I don't go out on a murder spree is because I'm afraid of the authorities. It has nothing to do with my own sense of survival. And for survival you know, we need to get along. It's too bad we need an authority to make us get along. There lies the entire problem.

A society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. It's not "the entire problem." It's what got us where we are today. The strongest/smartest/fastest leads, and get's to breed the most. It's what keeps every species going.

We formed a society to protect individual rights, and stop this.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: js1973
What is the purpose of a Government?

To give big business someone to bribe.

You're on the right track. The true purpose of government is to legislate the protection of (outmoded) business models which are based upon perpetual copyright and intellectual property, in spite of the advance of technology.

 

[wyvrn]

Yeah, does this thread ring a bell? You seriously need to get out more.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
I can tell that Amused is going to hijack this thread too.

Too?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: wyvrn
Yeah, does this thread ring a bell? You seriously need to get out more.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
I can tell that Amused is going to hijack this thread too.

Too?

That's hardly a "hijack." It stayed on topic about government handouts.

Go whine somewhere else.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: MacBaine Without order, there is Chaos.

uh huh. The reason I don't go out on a murder spree is because I'm afraid of the authorities. It has nothing to do with my own sense of survival. And for survival you know, we need to get along. It's too bad we need an authority to make us get along. There lies the entire problem.

A society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. It's not "the entire problem." It's what got us where we are today. The strongest/smartest/fastest leads, and get's to breed the most. It's what keeps every species going. We formed a society to protect individual rights, and stop this.

Nice theory, but this is what my experience suggests. Low cunning and aggression beats strongest/smartest/fastest about all the time in leadership.

Also, met a woman with 6 children. She is on welfare. In fact, I cannot think of anyone I have met recently who had 4 or more children who was not supported entirely by the State. If being smart/strong/fast were really always beneficial, then all finches would be 12 feet tall and savants. What really matters to genes is that the organism that will perpetuate them is adapted to it's particular environment. Momma getting a check for 6 kids has out competed just about every leader and ceo you can think of.

 

[wyvrn]

What does the title say? The thread was never about government handouts until you entered it, dumbass. You seriously need to get a life and stop spreading your anti-govt. propaganda.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
Yeah, does this thread ring a bell? You seriously need to get out more.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
I can tell that Amused is going to hijack this thread too.

Too?

That's hardly a "hijack." It stayed on topic about government handouts.

Go whine somewhere else.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: MacBaine Without order, there is Chaos.

uh huh. The reason I don't go out on a murder spree is because I'm afraid of the authorities. It has nothing to do with my own sense of survival. And for survival you know, we need to get along. It's too bad we need an authority to make us get along. There lies the entire problem.

A society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. It's not "the entire problem." It's what got us where we are today. The strongest/smartest/fastest leads, and get's to breed the most. It's what keeps every species going. We formed a society to protect individual rights, and stop this.

Nice theory, but this is what my experience suggests. Low cunning and aggression beats strongest/smartest/fastest about all the time in leadership.

Also, met a woman with 6 children. She is on welfare. In fact, I cannot think of anyone I have met recently who had 4 or more children who was not supported entirely by the State. If being smart/strong/fast were really always beneficial, then all finches would be 12 feet tall and savants. What really matters to genes is that the organism that will perpetuate them is adapted to it's particular environment. Momma getting a check for 6 kids has out competed just about every leader and ceo you can think of.

That makes my point, not breaks it. That welfare mother would not be able to survive and breed like that without a government that protects individual rights (or, in this case, tramples the rights of the many to give money to the lazy or stupid).

Think about all government and authority suddenly disappearing. What would happen?

Exactly what has happened throughout history: Feudalism

 

[Amused]

You asked about a book. I discussed the topic of that book which is about how to obtain government handouts.

Like I said, go whine somewhere else.

Originally posted by: wyvrn
What does the title say? The thread was never about government handouts until you entered it, dumbass. You seriously need to get a life and stop spreading your anti-govt. propaganda.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
Yeah, does this thread ring a bell? You seriously need to get out more.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
I can tell that Amused is going to hijack this thread too.

Too?

That's hardly a "hijack." It stayed on topic about government handouts.

Go whine somewhere else.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: wyvrn
Yeah, does this thread ring a bell? You seriously need to get out more.

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: wyvrn
I can tell that Amused is going to hijack this thread too.

Too?

actually, if that were to happen in this thread it would be on topic, and therefore not a hijacking, because we'd be talking about what gov't fundamentally does.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: MacBaine Without order, there is Chaos.

uh huh. The reason I don't go out on a murder spree is because I'm afraid of the authorities. It has nothing to do with my own sense of survival. And for survival you know, we need to get along. It's too bad we need an authority to make us get along. There lies the entire problem.

A society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. It's not "the entire problem." It's what got us where we are today. The strongest/smartest/fastest leads, and get's to breed the most. It's what keeps every species going. We formed a society to protect individual rights, and stop this.

Nice theory, but this is what my experience suggests. Low cunning and aggression beats strongest/smartest/fastest about all the time in leadership. Also, met a woman with 6 children. She is on welfare. In fact, I cannot think of anyone I have met recently who had 4 or more children who was not supported entirely by the State. If being smart/strong/fast were really always beneficial, then all finches would be 12 feet tall and savants. What really matters to genes is that the organism that will perpetuate them is adapted to it's particular environment. Momma getting a check for 6 kids has out competed just about every leader and ceo you can think of.

That makes my point, not breaks it. That welfare mother would not be able to survive and breed like that without a government that protects individual rights (or, in this case, tramples the rights of the many to give money to the lazy or stupid). Think about all government and authority suddenly disappearing. What would happen? Exactly what has happened throughout history: Feudalism

I am tired and therefore stupid. I reread your post with both eyes and mostly agree. The problem I am having is not so much with government in the abstract, but with the dark side if you will of human nature that makes oppressive governments and institutions more commonplace than democracies, and how people will work the system from either the top or bottom at the expense of others. I hate the 350 billion dollars spent annually in preparation to kill. Getting off off topic though.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
The primary function of any government is to keep itself in power. That occasionally some governments are benign does not change this fact.

then theres a legitimacy problem. if a gov't's, especially one of men instead of law, primary purpose it to keep itself in power, then its illegitimate. if its primary purpose is to serve and protect at the behest and request of the citizens under its authority, then its legitimate.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider The primary function of any government is to keep itself in power. That occasionally some governments are benign does not change this fact.

then theres a legitimacy problem. if a gov't's, especially one of men instead of law, primary purpose it to keep itself in power, then its illegitimate. if its primary purpose is to serve and protect at the behest and request of the citizens under its authority, then its legitimate.

I was stating rule 1 of principle of governments. Legitimacy is irrevelant.

Example:
Geo. Washington and the Whiskey Rebellion.
A force which I believe equal to the militia was sent to put it down. I wont quibble about exact numbers. It was not about booze, but tax. If need be, everyone in the rebellion would have been shot, because taxation is blood to governments. You can say anything about the US government, but you cannot reasonably state that the federal government (or any other) will step down because people refuse to support it with money. If you doubt it, refuse to pay taxes and send a nice little note to the IRS saying they should go. You will learn about all sorts of powers the State has. Like impounding your property and dealing with tax court where YOU have to prove your innocence. In tax court, you are assumed guilty unless you can demonstrate otherwise.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider The primary function of any government is to keep itself in power. That occasionally some governments are benign does not change this fact.

then theres a legitimacy problem. if a gov't's, especially one of men instead of law, primary purpose it to keep itself in power, then its illegitimate. if its primary purpose is to serve and protect at the behest and request of the citizens under its authority, then its legitimate.

I was stating rule 1 of principle of governments. Legitimacy is irrevelant.

Example:
Geo. Washington and the Whiskey Rebellion.
A force which I believe equal to the militia was sent to put it down. I wont quibble about exact numbers. It was not about booze, but tax. If need be, everyone in the rebellion would have been shot, because taxation is blood to governments. You can say anything about the US government, but you cannot reasonably state that the federal government (or any other) will step down because people refuse to support it with money. If you doubt it, refuse to pay taxes and send a nice little note to the IRS saying they should go. You will learn about all sorts of powers the State has. Like impounding your property and dealing with tax court where YOU have to prove your innocence. In tax court, you are assumed guilty unless you can demonstrate otherwise.

if everyone stopped paying taxes it would be impossible to enforce anything, including tax laws.

 

[smp]

Amused you and your libertarian ilk would have us beleive that it is not an individual's natural instinct to survive. You would have us all believe that we are naturally lazy and apathetic. My argument to you, and your libertarian ideology, is that it is a human's natural instinct to do anything in their power, to both survive and prosper. Libertarianism suggests that we need financial motives to prosper, to invent, to succeed and to survive. Without private property there would be no individual rights.
I disagree with it all.
Linux is a perfect example (and even though I understand most linux developers are libertarian, which to me doesn't make any fscking sense) of both survival and success, without a financial motive and yes, in a collective environment *GASP* .. the fact that a bunch of INDIVIDUALS got together to work towards a COMMON *GASP* goal without any financial reward and accomplishing something amazing, itself disproves your ideology. I am not a communist. Communist states are just that, states and it is the state that I am against, in all of it's forms, whether capitalist or communist. Communism was coercion.
On the other hand.... I agree totally with much of what libertarianism (objectivism maybe, whatever you want to call it, laissez faire) preaches, but it falls short. The term objectivism itself is highly flawed. Human beings are not objective, life is not objective, Ayn Rand and her capitalist ilk are not in the same league as Keirkegaard, Kant, Neitzche et al whatsoever. So how then, can you put faith in someone who preaches objectivity (without even acknowledging that pure objectivity in man is impossible!) and yet has no foundation in the study of life itself. Life can not be organized the same way as economics. I agree with the 'objectivist' point of view regarding the economy, but human life can not fit under that same umbrella. Therefore you can not organize a society under the libertarian ideology.

 

[smp]

The concept of private property is a flawed one as well.
One who is poor and has no assets, no property, only has labour as an asset. Trading your labour (your life) for food, shelter and security (fuedalistic serfdom), is coercion and slavery. Put the whip to me, or I might perish for lack of will to survive.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: smp
Amused you and your libertarian ilk would have us beleive that it is not an individual's natural instinct to survive. You would have us all believe that we are naturally lazy and apathetic. My argument to you, and your libertarian ideology, is that it is a human's natural instinct to do anything in their power, to both survive and prosper. Libertarianism suggests that we need financial motives to prosper, to invent, to succeed and to survive. Without private property there would be no individual rights.
I disagree with it all.
Linux is a perfect example (and even though I understand most linux developers are libertarian, which to me doesn't make any fscking sense) of both survival and success, without a financial motive and yes, in a collective environment *GASP* .. the fact that a bunch of INDIVIDUALS got together to work towards a COMMON *GASP* goal without any financial reward and accomplishing something amazing, itself disproves your ideology. I am not a communist. Communist states are just that, states and it is the state that I am against, in all of it's forms, whether capitalist or communist. Communism was coercion.
On the other hand.... I agree totally with much of what libertarianism (objectivism maybe, whatever you want to call it, laissez faire) preaches, but it falls short. The term objectivism itself is highly flawed. Human beings are not objective, life is not objective, Ayn Rand and her capitalist ilk are not in the same league as Keirkegaard, Kant, Neitzche et al whatsoever. So how then, can you put faith in someone who preaches objectivity (without even acknowledging that pure objectivity in man is impossible!) and yet has no foundation in the study of life itself. Life can not be organized the same way as economics. I agree with the 'objectivist' point of view regarding the economy, but human life can not fit under that same umbrella. Therefore you can not organize a society under the libertarian ideology.

SMP, again and again we do this dance, and you refuse to recognize history. We have had anarchy in history. The reason we don't recognize it is because it is as brief as it takes the next thug to take control. NEVER, in the history of man has a society lasted long without a leader, a tyrant or a government.

You can be against a state of any kind all you want. Just recognize the fact that it is the state protecting your right to speak against it, not you.

I have never said the will to survive is not inherent in humans. But so is the will to get a leg up. We are, by nature, competitive.

BTW, the developers of Linux DO proper from their labor, in the form of reputation... and that reputation leads to finacial opportunity. Unless the developers of Linux are living in a cardboard box (FAR from it), your "example" falls flat. The developers of Linux are NOT altruistic. They are all gaining something from their labor.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: smp
The concept of private property is a flawed one as well.
One who is poor and has no assets, no property, only has labour as an asset. Trading your labour (your life) for food, shelter and security (fuedalistic serfdom), is coercion and slavery. Put the whip to me, or I might perish for lack of will to survive.

Than life itself is slavery, for what did we trade for food when we had to hunt and grow it ourselves? What did we trade for shelter when we had to build it and maintain it ourselves? What did trade do for security when we had to fight for ourselves?

Our labor.

Only today, we trade our labor for money, and our money for goods. Either way, we must labor to survive.

SMP, do you ever think for yourself? Because you sure as hell aren't thinking things through very much.

 

[Spamela]

to give big business a way to write laws that benefit everyone, of course.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Spamela
to give big business a way to write laws that benefit everyone, of course.

you're employed, aren't you?

 

[glen]

Big buisness creates goods, money, and employment.
Why should they pay taxes?