SILK ROAD Creator's Plea for Leniency.

[rkbabang]

 

The thing I find most interesting about it is that it's pretty different than communism, but suffers from the same downfall, the idealized notion that people are better than they are.

 

The only true premise is that people are inherently selfish and will act in their own best interest. That's it.

 

Trying to catch up on all the posts here, but I'll respond to this one now.  People always act in what they think is their own self interest at the time (it doesn't always turn out to be obviously).  This is the reason a government made up of people can not work.  People can't be trusted, but they somehow get a set of angles wings once being elected or appointed to a position of mostly unaccountable power?  How does this magic happen?  People do not change their stripes, as a matter of fact quite the opposite is true.  Power brings out the worst in otherwise good people.  Power both corrupts and attracts the already corrupted.

 

[RichardGibbons]

People can't be trusted, but they somehow get a set of angles wings once being elected or appointed to a position of mostly unaccountable power?

 

Therein is the answer you seek. Elected positions in the USA aren't mostly unaccountable, they just seem that way sometimes.

 

[rkbabang]

People can't be trusted, but they somehow get a set of angles wings once being elected or appointed to a position of mostly unaccountable power?

 

Therein is the answer you seek. Elected positions in the USA aren't mostly unaccountable, they just seem that way sometimes.

 

 

Good one!

 

I almost forgot about the yearly calls from the IRS fund raisers detailing what the government plans on doing with my money in the next year (what companies they plan to subsidize, what weapons they plan to build, who they plan to send drones to murder, etc) and asking me if I'd still wish to contribute.  "Can we count on the same generous donation as last year?"...

 

Silly me, I'm acting as if I don't pay they'd send armed men to kidnap me and put me in a cage like an animal, or kill me if I

resist.

[yadayada]

People can't be trusted, but they somehow get a set of angles wings once being elected or appointed to a position of mostly unaccountable power?

 

Therein is the answer you seek. Elected positions in the USA aren't mostly unaccountable, they just seem that way sometimes.

 

 

Good one!

 

I almost forgot about the yearly calls from the IRS fund raisers detailing what the government plans on doing with my money in the next year (what companies they plan to subsidize, what weapons they plan to build, who they plan to send drones to murder, etc) and asking me if I'd still wish to contribute.  "Can we count on the same generous donation as last year?"...

 

Silly me, I'm acting as if I don't pay they'd send armed men to kidnap me and put me in a cage like an animal, or kill me if I

resist.

If you remove government you get anarchy. This has been proven time and time again. You get a power vacuum, and you get the same situation in Somalia, or a new government. People want to be led. Just study history.

 

Also just because you guys in the US really suck at running a normal government does not mean a government is all bad. A lot of countries do it right.

 

And incidently, most countries with a strong government (but not overly dominating like in North korea) have done extremely well economically. Just look at Singapore, strong government keeping it all together. All the surrounding countries had weak governments resulting in a dysfunctional rule of law and crappy economies and corruption.

 

Imo, read Better angels of our nature, and you will be a lot less libertarian. Incidently, in a lot of dysfunctional poor countries a lot of rational actors all act in their own best interest, and that is not always the best interest of the group as a whole.

 

Pure libertarian systems are flawed for the same exact reason communism is flawed, it all works great in some theoretical fairytail world, but not in the real world.

 

If the entire population of a country would consist of well natured engineers that had complete information, it would work great. But that is not the reality.

 

Additionally, your assumptions of 'people acting rational and everything will be alright' is majorily flawed for another reason: incomplete information. Went into that in my last post.

 

Also if the US government wasn't there, you honestly think no other group will come and ask some form of tax? Again look at poor countries with next to no government. Maybe in some future utopia this is possible. Where we are all genetically engineered to have iq's of 180 and high empathy levels where robots do all the work for us. Maybe some libtertarian system is possible there, but we are not there yet.

[spartansaver]

I see both sides to this case, yes a person should be able to do whatever they want. At the same time, should a kid who is decent at using a computer be allowed to purchase drugs online in the most accessible way possible. I don't know really how The Silk Road worked, but from the very small amount I've read, that's what I've gathered. Also I'm of the group that not every single person should be allowed a gun and there should be regulation in place. I'm part of a family that is very pro gun, but I don't think that ex cons or the mentally unstable should be allowed them. I know there are already black markets for these products, but the accessibility of being able to click and buy seems much too convenient. I see the good in government even if I don't agree with everything in place.

Hopefully this doesn't get too far off topic with the gun comments being made, but from what I read there was a black market on the Silk Road for more than just drugs.

[CanadianMunger]

People can't be trusted, but they somehow get a set of angles wings once being elected or appointed to a position of mostly unaccountable power?

 

Therein is the answer you seek. Elected positions in the USA aren't mostly unaccountable, they just seem that way sometimes.

 

 

Good one!

 

I almost forgot about the yearly calls from the IRS fund raisers detailing what the government plans on doing with my money in the next year (what companies they plan to subsidize, what weapons they plan to build, who they plan to send drones to murder, etc) and asking me if I'd still wish to contribute.  "Can we count on the same generous donation as last year?"...

 

Silly me, I'm acting as if I don't pay they'd send armed men to kidnap me and put me in a cage like an animal, or kill me if I

resist.

If you remove government you get anarchy. This has been proven time and time again. You get a power vacuum, and you get the same situation in Somalia, or a new government. People want to be led. Just study history.

 

Also just because you guys in the US really suck at running a normal government does not mean a government is all bad. A lot of countries do it right.

 

And incidently, most countries with a strong government (but not overly dominating like in North korea) have done extremely well economically. Just look at Singapore, strong government keeping it all together. All the surrounding countries had weak governments resulting in a dysfunctional rule of law and crappy economies and corruption.

 

Imo, read Better angels of our nature, and you will be a lot less libertarian. Incidently, in a lot of dysfunctional poor countries a lot of rational actors all act in their own best interest, and that is not always the best interest of the group as a whole.

 

Pure libertarian systems are flawed for the same exact reason communism is flawed, it all works great in some theoretical fairytail world, but not in the real world.

 

If the entire population of a country would consist of well natured engineers that had complete information, it would work great. But that is not the reality.

 

Additionally, your assumptions of 'people acting rational and everything will be alright' is majorily flawed for another reason: incomplete information. Went into that in my last post.

 

Also if the US government wasn't there, you honestly think no other group will come and ask some form of tax? Again look at poor countries with next to no government. Maybe in some future utopia this is possible. Where we are all genetically engineered to have iq's of 180 and high empathy levels where robots do all the work for us. Maybe some libtertarian system is possible there, but we are not there yet.

 

Pinker and his Better Angels thoroughly debunked by Taleb & Cirillo:

 

http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/violence.pdf

 

-CM

[yadayada]

Thanks for posting, it seems he debunks death tolls by war going down? But murder rate claim seems in tact? I dont understand all the math in that thing. I still think most of my point stands though. Weaker government = higher murder rate and lower wealth. No governments generally = complete chaos.

[RichardGibbons]

I almost forgot about the yearly calls from the IRS fund raisers detailing what the government plans on doing with my money in the next year (what companies they plan to subsidize, what weapons they plan to build, who they plan to send drones to murder, etc) and asking me if I'd still wish to contribute.  "Can we count on the same generous donation as last year?"...

 

Silly me, I'm acting as if I don't pay they'd send armed men to kidnap me and put me in a cage like an animal, or kill me if I resist.

 

Wow, these guys sound horrible. Luckily, since they're so awful, you should have no problem convincing the electorate to vote for someone who will abolish them. Democracy rocks--it's so awesome that you can have a huge gripe like this and, when you convinced the electorate to agree with you, vote in a government to address your concerns.

 

It's such a great example of true accountability, society avoiding fringe views only held by a few ideologues who haven't really thought things through in any depth, while still providing justice for people like you with righteous causes that everyone cannot help but agree with.

[wachtwoord]

They are only horrible to the small minority who actually contribute to the economy (instead of being parasitic on it).

 

Majority decides aye?

[rkbabang]

I almost forgot about the yearly calls from the IRS fund raisers detailing what the government plans on doing with my money in the next year (what companies they plan to subsidize, what weapons they plan to build, who they plan to send drones to murder, etc) and asking me if I'd still wish to contribute.  "Can we count on the same generous donation as last year?"...

 

Silly me, I'm acting as if I don't pay they'd send armed men to kidnap me and put me in a cage like an animal, or kill me if I resist.

 

Wow, these guys sound horrible. Luckily, since they're so awful, you should have no problem convincing the electorate to vote for someone who will abolish them. Democracy rocks--it's so awesome that you can have a huge gripe like this and, when you convinced the electorate to agree with you, vote in a government to address your concerns.

 

It's such a great example of true accountability, society avoiding fringe views only held by a few ideologues who haven't really thought things through in any depth, while still providing justice for people like you with righteous causes that everyone cannot help but agree with.

 

Most people literally don't care who Obama murders. They've been programmed from their earliest age by the state to worship it.  Look at the programming by the church hundreds of years ago, it doesn't mean the majority are correct in their thinking simply because they are the majority, especially after undergoing decades of extensive brainwashing.  I know I'm wasting my time here, it is like trying to convince a cult member that their charismatic leader isn't really going to lead them to the comet which will carry them to the promised land as soon as they drink the cool-aid...  Hundreds of millions have died at the hands of the state and hundreds of millions of more will die before humanity wises up.

 

 

 

 

 

[yadayada]

I like how you selectively ignore my arguments lol. I have a feeling this is an emotional thing, and not really based on reason. You honestly sound the same as those extreme lefties with their 'capitalism is evil'. Except you are all the way at the other end.

 

Basically:

Extreme lefties: those evil corporations, let's give the government lot's of power!

Libertarians: Those evil governments, let's give corporations lot's of power by removing government's power!

 

And they both make the argument that one thing to become too powerful is bad. But their solution is then to make the other thing too powerful.

 

Without a government that has some kind of serious power, it would just mean some other entity would just gain a lot more power instead. The solution is in the middle, both entities should have some power. It is like physics, the law of conservation of power.

 

Look at the US in the 19th century. This incident specifically:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Strike

 

The US was basically a libertarian dream in the 19th century. But it did not work out and caused a lot of friction because large corporations were getting more and more powerful, and abusing that power. And there was not really an organized entity to counter that power. So as a reaction to that, a more powerful government was erected. So basically the government you hate so much, is a consequence of a libertarian system of actors acting in their best interest! Because the Carnegie steel mills were basically abusing workers, working them to death for next to nothing. And when they did not like that and occupied the factory they hired mercenaries to shoot them down and hire new workers. Yay freedom.

 

And remember those bank robbers in the 1930's - 50's? With John dillinger etc. He had better equipment then local police forces, and that was abused to the limit by various psychopaths. They had faster cars, better weapons etc. So as a response to that, the FBI was set up. And the people pay some money to this central entity to prevent things like that happen.

 

Now the problem is that J edgar Hoover of the FBI started abusing this power later on (with Jimmy carter I think, afraid of firing him).

 

So no FBI is bad, but FBI with too much power is bad too. So the solution is not 'no government', but some government that is transparant and controlled and kept in check by the people. In a lot of countries this system works quite well (mostly smaller countries though).

 

The main weakness here is apathy of regular people. If enough people don't care, or are too stupid to care, then this does not work. Because then what happens, either the government loses power, or gains too much power. But that does not mean 'no government' is the solution. It means the problem of government becoming too powerful is solved by enough people actually caring and making sure that power is kept in check, which is not really happening in the US at the moment.

[RichardGibbons]

I think you've got it completely right, yadayada, and expressed it brilliantly.

 

There are plenty of examples of extreme people today, and it seems obvious that you need a political model that is robust enough to work even in a world with extreme people.  Why bother proposing any model that breaks in a completely obvious manner the minute you toss a single extreme person into the mix?

[wachtwoord]

I like how you selectively ignore my arguments lol. I have a feeling this is an emotional thing, and not really based on reason. You honestly sound the same as those extreme lefties with their 'capitalism is evil'. Except you are all the way at the other end.

 

Basically:

Extreme lefties: those evil corporations, let's give the government lot's of power!

Libertarians: Those evil governments, let's give corporations lot's of power by removing government's power!

 

And they both make the argument that one thing to become too powerful is bad. But their solution is then to make the other thing too powerful.

 

Without a government that has some kind of serious power, it would just mean some other entity would just gain a lot more power instead. The solution is in the middle, both entities should have some power. It is like physics, the law of conservation of power.

 

It's basically centralization (governments) versus decentralization. Centralization is suboptimal and shoild therefore disappear altogether.

 

If the US was run like in the 19th century I would probably move there. Right now it's one of the last countries I'd want to live. Hell my country of sociolists is preferrable.

 

PS: I support the actions of the company you describe. The workers occupied the factory. You should be allowed to protect your property.