- Dragon Ball Z Forum
- →
- The Lounge
- →
- Deep Discussion
- →
- Political Views
| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Political Views | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 18 2011, 03:25 AM (3,187 Views) | |
| SirParagon | Nov 18 2011, 03:08 AM Post #16 |
Sparking!
|
Democracy, monarchy, communism, fascism, they're all theories that amount to different degrees of the same thing in practice (people farms, free-range or intensive?). I've said this before, but no harm in saying it again human nature is not a constant, it is adaptive in response to experience, no one is born bad just as no one is born good. The current situation does not exclusively dictate our only paths into the future, there are many ways to resolve issues and most do not involve violence. The government's response to any issue is to point a gun at it in one way or another. Like you mentioned, under the current circumstances "you can have a theoretically flawless system but in reality, some people are scum and screw it up for their own selfish needs", this extends to members of government more than anything. If you have a system built on the distrust of others of course it is going to be flawed, especially democracy (we trust the people we distrust to vote for other people who we should also logically distrust). We should focus on initiating mutually beneficial transactions rather than attempting to ram pikes up the ***** of the people we don't like. Edited by SirParagon, Nov 18 2011, 03:42 AM.
|
|
New Account: Spirit Metaphor Voluntarism? | |
 |
 
|
| Meowth | Nov 18 2011, 04:13 AM Post #17 |
=._.=
|
I'm not sure if you answered his question, what would you replace a government with? For a functioning society, you do need some form of structure and let's face it, while governments are corrupt, it is still a better form of running than several tribes because if you have multiple tribes, you are going to have more problems arrising. It's all fine and well saying you don't like politcians or governments, but what would you do diffrently? |
 
| |
|
|
|
| + Pelador | Nov 18 2011, 04:22 AM Post #18 |
Crazy Awesome Legend
|
To be honest I think our current systems work fine. My only issue is that we keep having ecomonic problems every decade. That needs to be fixed. of course that's much easier said than done. But we can vote for who we like and have lots of different people and parties to choose from. We can cuss out leaders in the street and not be dragged off to a deathcamp. We don't even have to go to work if we don't want to. We're very, very lucky to have governments lke we have. Even if they are a bit corrupt and seemingly useless. Could be a lot worse. I mean look at Zimbabwe or Syria? I bet they'd give their left nuts to have as much personal freedom as we have. |
 http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits | |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2011, 04:33 AM Post #19 |
|
What it all boils down to is this: despite the fact that our government is corrupt, it's still one of the best in the world. We are a free people. The fact that some people try to dispute this astounds me. Over the past few decades our flexibility in regards to freedoms such as the right to free speech has increased dramatically. You can talk about pretty much anything on the radio without fear of punishment, you can vote for whoever you want to in elections. Would you rather live in a monarchy where we have fewer freedoms and cannot even have a say in our leader? Would you rather live in an anarchy and live in chaos, fearing riots and takeovers every day? I wouldn't. In the end, we are the best that we can be. Our government isn't perfect by any means, but I'd much rather live in a democracy where I at least have a say in what happens in the country than in any other form of government. |
|
|
|
| SirParagon | Nov 18 2011, 04:48 AM Post #20 |
|
Sparking!
|
This isn't a matter of answering how to replace government, it's pointing out that government is immoral in that it initiates force in response to anything. No one had a clue that slaves would be replaced by enormous mechanical auto-harvesting contraptions back in the 1800s, there was plenty of pro-slavery arguments back usually revolving around "who will pick the cotton?!". Everyone now accepts that slavery is immoral, abolishing government is simply another step toward a more moral global society. My faith is in the free market, needs will always be satisfied if there is potential for profit. Edited by SirParagon, Nov 18 2011, 04:51 AM.
|
|
New Account: Spirit Metaphor Voluntarism? | |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2011, 04:52 AM Post #21 |
|
You lost me there. Do you really think that abolishing government would be a wise decision? That would be like having dozens of five-year-olds at a birthday party, and then suddenly taking away all adult supervision.  Well, not exactly, but you get the point. Abolishing our government would completely destroy the country. |
|
|
|
| SirParagon | Nov 18 2011, 04:55 AM Post #22 |
|
Sparking!
|
It's simple, government initiates force therefore it is immoral. What isn't a wise decision is giving all the guns in the world to a select few then trusting them to behave peacefully. Indeed, no government means no taxation, no state, no country. That's a good thing. Countries aren't real, people are real. The concept of countries serves as an 'us against them' motivation for conflict. Remember that zero government does not mean zero rules. Edited by SirParagon, Nov 18 2011, 04:59 AM.
|
|
New Account: Spirit Metaphor Voluntarism? | |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2011, 05:00 AM Post #23 |
|
Hmm... Force is immoral? So you are also saying that defending our country from evil is immoral? Are you saying that standing by and watching thousands of people get massacred by Hitler and letting our own innocent citizens be murdered by Middle Eastern terrorists is better than fighting back, saving lives, and protecting our own safety? I'm going to have to disagree, not only because of that, but because without government, everything would be chaos. We would end up destroying ourselves if some other country didn't get to us first. |
|
|
|
| + Pelador | Nov 18 2011, 05:04 AM Post #24 |
|
Crazy Awesome Legend
|
So who is it who enforces the rules without a governement? And when society changes it's moral values as it tends to do every decade or so, who decides when these rules need to be ammended or changed? Without taxation, how are we supposed to fund schools, hospitals, libraries, community housing, enforcment, fire services ect ect? That's what taxes are for. Or did you think that money peopole pay the government every month just all goes towards the upkeep of rich people's swimming pools? |
|
http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits | |
|
|
|
| SirParagon | Nov 18 2011, 05:05 AM Post #25 |
|
Sparking!
|
The only time force is acceptable is out of self-defense. The initiation of force is always immoral, ALWAYS. Who do you think spurred terrorist attacks in the first place? Doesn't take much thought to figure that one out. Tell me how everything isn't chaos right now, tell me how we aren't destroying ourselves right now. @ Pelador, I already mentioned this isn't an argument concerning how, it's concerning why. The hows are irrelevant. It's no use trying to apply government concepts to solutions in a society without government force. Such things would be up to the vast thinking power of the free market to solve. Edited by SirParagon, Nov 18 2011, 05:10 AM.
|
|
New Account: Spirit Metaphor Voluntarism? | |
|
|
|
| Mihawk | Nov 18 2011, 05:09 AM Post #26 |
 
|
What about people that can't defend themselves. |
 | |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2011, 05:10 AM Post #27 |
|
I wouldn't say that we are destroying ourselves by any means. Corruptions does not mean imminent destruction. There is always going to be corruption. Your first point is irrevelent; I do not believe that we ever initiated anything. illstand, thanks for adding that. Edited by Doggo Champion 2k17, Nov 18 2011, 05:11 AM.
|
|
|
|
| SirParagon | Nov 18 2011, 05:11 AM Post #28 |
|
Sparking!
|
Self-defence also extends to the defence of others. @ObsessiveFanGirl Nothing occurs without reason, history shows that the terrorists are responding to an initiation of force against them. Edited by SirParagon, Nov 18 2011, 05:15 AM.
|
|
New Account: Spirit Metaphor Voluntarism? | |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2011, 05:12 AM Post #29 |
|
Well in that case, all of your points about the U.S. and war have been irrevelent because the U.S. has never initiated anything unless it was for the purpose of self-defense or the defense of liberty. |
|
|
|
| Mihawk | Nov 18 2011, 05:13 AM Post #30 |
|
Self defense = defending yourself. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 4:50 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy