This is funny when you think about it. We need a huge gang of thieves to steal our resources because supposedly we cannot build a flat place. Never mind that mind control (which is what government means), never actually builds the roads. What they do is steal a whole bunch of money. Take less than 10% of the stolen goods and pay a bunch of people like me and you to build that flat place you claim we could never do without mind control.
Try thinking in terms of being responsible. Try thinking in terms of morals. You cannot be free until you are responsible and you will not be moral until you realize morals are equally beneficial to everyone. I don't have the right to assault anyone, which in reality means I can't give a thug the right to do so either. Thinking that you can is immoral and irrational for the same reason you cannot give trillions of dollars away if you don't have it.
Morals are relative. I believe that living in a community, which is what countries are, and letting someone who contributes to that community die because they can't afford healthcare is immoral. Killing someone through complacency seems far worse to me than insisting that everyone in a community has to contribute to that community.
And it's not like you can't build that flat place, but you're probably going to do a shit job at it compared to a professional. Unless you're a marxist and believe that the professional should just do the job with the expectation that his neighbor will feed him and his other neighbor will take care of his plumbing. I don't mind that philosophy, but it has yet to work in a real-world scenario on a large scale. I'm not willing to take that bet either, seeing people typically lose their sense of empathy for each other in communities larger than 400 people. Less than that, and you run into the problem of protecting your community from larger aggressors.
I agree that you have to be responsible, but part of that is paying into the publicly available resources you use. Not contributing to those costs yet expecting to stay a part of that society is the height of irresponsibility.
Ultimately I value my freedom. But as restrictive as governments can be, I've never found my government to be nearly as oppressive as some of my employers. So if capitalism is to persist, governments are going to be needed to ensure we don't become a country of a few slave owners that employ us at slave wages.
"Morals are relative." does this mean murder is relative?
"And it's not like you can't build that flat place, but you're probably going to do a shit job at it compared to a professional"
The same people (the professional) would be paid only it would happen cheaper without force!
"I'm not willing to take that bet"
You are betting that government is going to protect you. It is a lot like playing poker only the only action that is allowed is anteing up, but you don't get to have any cards dealt to you. Thus there is no chance of you winning.
"I agree that you have to be responsible"
None of us have the choice to not be responsible. It is only some of us don't realize that is what freedom is all about.
"I've never found my government to be nearly as oppressive as some of my employers."
All governments in the western world are on the NYC stock exchange. So who do you think owns the mind control if it is not corporations?
So your solution to the government that is corrupted by corporations is to get rid of the taxes that support that government, therein dismantling that government and letting these corporations directly screw you? I don't like the level of corruption in government either, but the solution is to educate voters on what corruption looks like, not get rid of the only body that has the authority to regulate those corporations. Much like a business, if things are poorly managed you fire the incompetent employees, you don't shut down the business.
Everyone has a choice to be irresponsible. There are just consequences to that effect. Not everyone wants freedom either. It sounds like a crazy concept, but there's a sizable portion of the population that would prefer the simplicity of just following orders and submitting. Not that I think they should govern policy either mind you, but it's important to understand they exist and it's their "freedom" to choose to submit.
You're right, betting long term that the government will protect you is a poor bet. But it's better than the guaranteed losses of taking on the world as an individual. Again, you can vote in a new government, you can't vote for the people around you not to screw you over the first chance they get.
How do you figure a private contractor, who needs to cover costs AND make a profit, is going to be cheaper than the government who only needs to cover costs? Not that it's entirely relevant in the case of roads. Private companies tend to get the contracts anyway, the government is just a conduit to make sure they have a single point of contact to get paid. If you want that contractor to go around to each house to collect expect the cost to go up accordingly.
"murder" is a judgement. Killing someone is the action, and yes, it's relative. If it's in clear self defense, I think almost everyone would agree it's morally acceptable. What if I kill someone for trespassing on my property? What if a cop shoots a suspect that's running away or incapacitated? Depending on who you ask you'll get different answers on those last two. I'd say it's arrogant to say your view is the only right view.
"I'd say it's arrogant to say your view is the only right view."
When did I say this?
To me this is a sign of cognitive dissonance, which means the contradiction in your own statements are making you feel uncomfortable. I am sorry about that. The good news is that if you think about it contradiction don't actually exist, but the premises used to describe reality are in conflict because one of the premises is wrong.
Murder is always a crime because the act of murder is without the justification of self defense, which is as you say universally is understood to not be a wrong.
"How do you figure a private contractor, who needs to cover costs AND make a profit, is going to be cheaper than the government who only needs to cover costs?"
One a private contractor is building the roads today on the tit of mind control welfare.
Two the too expensive resource that mind control (governments) cost is not the money, but the health, welfare and freedom of the individual. There are some things that a man or a women should not up with put. There are also some condition that makes living hell. I would suggest to you that slavery is one of those condition.
"taking on the world as an individual"
Whether you realize it or not you are taking on the world as an individual. Your life and indeed your death matters not to the slave master and in reality you're willing compliance is what they want. To get it they create the conditions for Stockholmes syndrome and get you to defend and protect your assaulters, which by the way is what you are doing right now.
I agree with you that the real solution is education as indoctrination is the exact opposite of education. Indoctrination merely requires you to accept enslavement and is easier than knowing yourself well enough to educate yourself.
Is why I think of freedom as a responsibility and a duty!
Sorry, I worded that poorly. I don't get the impression that you're arrogant, I was just referring to the concept of thinking your way is the only way is arrogant.
I'm also not uncomfortable with my own statements. They line up perfectly with how I view the world, which is why I think the way I do.
You're right about the definition of murder, and as I intended to allude to murder is wrong by definition. If it's deemed just cause, then it's not called murder. As I said though, self defense is the easy one that we can easily agree on. What about the police shooting a fleeing suspect or shooting someone trespassing on your property? I would say both of those should be considered murder. Am I indefensibly wrong? Are the people who disagree with me indefensibly wrong? Abortion is another good one I think. Is it moral to force a woman to carry and birth a baby? Is it moral to prevent a fetus from being born? There are things we can almost all agree are bad, but most morals are a matter of opinion. I'd also say things that are always a crime aren't always immoral. We can probably agree that there are plenty of laws that only serve to restrict and suppress that should have never been written down.
I would agree slavery is one of those conditions, but I'd also say the government is the only thing preventing slavery in certain areas in situations. Without a federal governing body each smaller community will do as they wish, and I would put money on some of those communities allowing actual slavery. So while you might find your own safe an happy place, many others will find themselves in that very hell.
Humans evolved, physically and culturally, to work in communities. You have to go pretty far out of your way to truly take on the world alone. I think there should be somewhere for people to go if they want to drop out of society and live a truly free life on their own strength, but I don't think government should be dismantled as a whole.
The government doesn't assault me. I pay taxes like I would pay for any other service. By staying a part of society, I agree to carry the burden of cost to support the services that I want from my government. If I don't like a particular service, I speak and vote accordingly. I liment your lack of options to find your own utopia, but I'm quite happy with my current situation. I'm not a slave, as I still receive money that I can do with as I please. The amount I get paid is based on the assumption that I have to pay taxes. If I didn't pay taxes, the company I work for would almost certainly take advantage of that and pay me less. If I change my mind about my situation, I have the freedom to leave this society, even if it's just floating on a boat in the ocean.
I think we agree pretty soundly on the idea of education. Indoctrination is unavoidable. Be it from government, teachers, parents or any form of authority, there will always be someone telling you what to think. We have to get better at looking deeper into issues and making informed decisions.
I've weighed my options and chose the path that seems optimal. I can change that path at any time I feel is necessary. That is my freedom.
Sadly there are many points I would have to disagree with. Your statement do not reflect a organized social group of human beings, but a free for all. You can by your own admissions recognize immoral behavior, but you have no moral character or moral fortitude and refuse to support moral behavior.
"What about the police shooting a fleeing suspect or shooting someone trespassing on your property? I would say both of those should be considered murder."
The fact is that it is not considered murder and yet you knowingly are in support of a system that has legalized murder. As a human being you get to believe whatever you want. I would however suggest to you that the fact that you will suffer the consequences of that support of murder is proof that you do not have a choice about being responsible.
That actually makes you a knowing accomplice to murder, which by the way in much of the western world is punishable by death. Thus the belief that it is OK to support murder is in direct contradiction with your knowledge that murder is wrong.
The above facts about what you have said is what makes below statement either a lie, or the statement of a very confused individual and at the very least morally ill person.
"I'm also not uncomfortable with my own statements. They line up perfectly with how I view the world, which is why I think the way I do."
There is no way a intelligent person cannot know that the above statements can only be from either a victim of Stockholmes syndrome or from someone who is morally depraved.
If you wish to live in a commune then sure, have at it. Pretty sure that's by and large an option to you. But a country wide removal of government would be a free for all. Millions of people can not organize themselves.
In my country, Canada, the police are not allowed to shoot people, shooting someone for trespassing is illegal, and the death penalty is completely abolished. My conscience is clear in that regard, but where my government has failed I support politicians that I trust to change the country for the better. I get the impression you don't trust any politician, but there are those with a record that I can get behind to represent me.
If you want your way of doing things, join or create a commune. En masse, new governments would ultimately form, many of them more oppressive than you experience now. You can't change human nature, and human nature consists of followers and leaders. Followers will always gather around a leader, making true anarchy unsustainable.
So if you want to damn some of your fellow man to actual slavery and death so that you don't have to pay taxes or adhere to laws, make no mistake that you lack any morals of value. I do not share your morals in that regard, and I feel the better man for it.