ClumsyMonkey.net

lukin wrote:Heh, I've noticed we have similiar taste in music in general.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

By reading what some of you people are saying...I feel like such a dummy.

It's a pretty good conversation we have going here eh?

Corey & Reno, since you guys think before you post, I will do the same for you and reply later with a detailed defense/critique. but since i'm short on time I'm going to give it to J-Neli first and get to your points later.

first of all, I don't respect YOUR VIEWS? You're the one who has dismissed market anarchism out of hand without bothering to qualify that or post any worthy critisicm! That's a clear sign of contempt for me and my beliefs, and it's worsened by the fact that you don't even have a solid philisophical basis for your view.

i have explained why i believe gov't is wrong. i will again. but not to you. you don't want to learn, you don't care to learn. you're close minded. you're right, for you, this discussion is over.

J-Neli wrote:It's a pretty good conversation we have going here eh?

Yeah you do. Keep it up.

its so intellectual and stuff

I have read every word that you have wrote throughout this entire thread and have tried to comprehend your anarchist views but they do not seem realistic in my mind. you're pretty well describing a utopian society based on power and money. Nothing more, nothing less. The wealthier you are the better you are, and I don't believe thats correct.

I don't need to justify democracy since we can witness a plethora of examples around the world of how democracy has overcome any other form of government. If you can somehow ignore that, than I truly do not want to be involved in this conversation any longer.

I have gave plenty of worthy rebuttals and posts, when I've had time to make them. You can go back through the pages to witness those if you'd like as well.

Are you saying that I'm an anarchist?

and dude, I dont believe that the wealthier one is, the better one is. After, I'm not exactly rolling in money. I make enough money to qualify as a destitute.

look, guys.

anarchy would not be perfect. there are always going to be irrational individuals. the point i am trying to make is that market anarchism is morally valid and doesn't rely on force.

government on the other hand requires force to exist. force and government go hand in hand.

your right but you can make amendments to the constitution and deem laws unconstitutional and get rid of corrupt politicans, but what do you do to fix anarchy?

there's nothing wrong with anarchism, per se. it's the people inside of it that would be the troublesome part.

some people could and would abuse their new freedoms with more abandon then previously. however, institutions set up by the market could and would prevent this. private security companies and arbitrators would take over where the state left off, the only difference is that they would be voluntary institutions.

the most important distinction between the market and democracy is that the market is a system of proportional representation, that is, if 10% of the population wants pink donuts and 90% wants green ones, the donut company will make 10 pink donuts and 90 green ones, as opposed to democracy where only green donuts are made and the 10 people who wanted pink ones go unhappy.

Not true at all. If less pink donuts are made then they will cost more to produce. You cannot argue with that. That means there is a smaller profit margin for pink donuts. Me, being the smart business man I am, would not bother to make pink donuts if it doesn't make much money for me. This is why you will see flavors come and go. They don't turn a profit even though the few people that like them will buy them.

Here is a spreadsheet and graph that shows what I mean. Notice that with the less pink donuts I produce the more money I make. Feel free to plug in some of your own numbers and see how the graph updates.

http://corey.dynu.net/temp/donut_cost.xls

somebody would fill the hole Corey. Maybe you only make green donuts, but i decide to open up a small donut shop and sell pink ones.

the free market works.

what stops you from doing that now?

well, for starters, it costs a lot to open up a food business in this country. regulation, you know.

but the point chris was originally trying to make is that market anarchism is a system where every person's beliefs are represented, respected, and eventually catered too whereas demockracy is not.

:hmm:

Doug Bin Laden wrote:well, for starters, it costs a lot to open up a food business in this country. regulation, you know.

but the point chris was originally trying to make is that market anarchism is a system where every person's beliefs are represented, respected, and eventually catered too whereas demockracy is not.

nothing forces you to respect other people's beliefs in anarchy. In fact, it openly suggests not to respect eachother's beliefs.

the idea behind market anarchism is the non-agression principle.

we believe that you should be free do to what you want as long as you dont' try to force me to do anything.

that means that if the world were anarchist, and you, reno and a few others wanted to get together and build a wall around your private property and then enforce laws and elect governments within that wall, that would be your business.

Isn't that what the US did?

not quite. the difference between the us government and what i described above is that i was talking about a voluntary government. the united states government is not voluntary.

you don't have a choice about which laws you obey. you don't have a choice about paying taxes or not.

in market anarchism, you have all those choices, even if you choose to let somebody else (ie an elected govenor) make some or all of them for you. and you ultimately retain the choice to one day stop letting that person make those choices for you.