Gary Johnson AMA

[Napolean]

The fact that Evil people exist is precisely why I say Anarchy can never work.

 

[REIMktg]

Let me know if you call 911 when somethings going down. Hate all you want, but a partially accountable and subject to investigation by multiple cross jurisdictional law enforcement agencies is better than going against multiple groups that are making up the rules as they go along.

 

[Napolean]

Let me know if you call 911 when somethings going down.

I guess I'll have to call whoever is most appropriate since burying someone in my backyard would put me in prison.

Or am I supposed to be super optimistic and think if I dial 3 magic numbers, the police will just spawn in my front yard and chase the bad guys away?

Hate all you want, but a partially accountable and subject to investigation by multiple cross jurisdictional law enforcement agencies is better than going against multiple groups that are making up the rules as they go along.

If I am reading this correctly, you are insinuating that they do not make up the rules as they go along?

A little off topic if I may, how do you keep the sand out of your eyes when you bury your head in it?

 

[REIMktg]

I guess I'll have to call whoever is most appropriate since burying someone in my backyard would put me in prison.

Or am I supposed to be super optimistic and think if I dial 3 magic numbers, the police will just spawn in my front yard and chase the bad guys away?

In the end everyone calls the police. Can you pull a gun and protect yourself, of course, I would, but for most problems people call the Govt. If there's a mob in your street, you may pull a gun and stay inside, but are you going to break it up yourself or call the cops? Most people in the US will call the cops, except of course for my LA Korean Shopkeeper friends, the rest dial 911.

And yes, they do show up in a flash. If you live in a decent neighborhood you will have 5 cop cars at your house faster than you can imagine because they are all bored to death just waiting for a call.

If I am reading this correctly, you are insinuating that they do not make up the rules as they go along?

A little off topic if I may, how do you keep the sand out of your eyes when you bury your head in it?

Actually 99% of the time they tow the line and follow the rules. Few make up the rules as they go and those eventually get weeded out. Far better odds than trusting surrounding Anarchists to stick to their Non Aggression principles when it does not suit them.

 

[Napolean]

In the end everyone calls the police. Can you pull a gun and protect yourself, of course, I would, but for most problems people call the Govt. If there's a mob in your street, you may pull a gun and stay inside, but are you going to break it up yourself or call the cops? Most people in the US will call the cops, except of course for my LA Korean Shopkeeper friends, the rest dial 911.

Why would I call the cops if there is a mob in my street? Or your reference to the L.A riots?

What would I possibly be telling the police that they don't already know?

And yes, they do show up in a flash. If you live in a decent neighborhood you will have 5 cop cars at your house faster than you can imagine because they are all bored to death just waiting for a call.

Maybe for a noise complaint. But not when someones life depends on them. Police are under no obligation to protect you from a threat, and you don't have to throw a stick very far to hear them make that statement.

Actually 99% of the time they tow the line and follow the rules. Few make up the rules as they go and those eventually get weeded out. Far better odds than trusting surrounding Anarchists to stick to their Non Aggression principles when it does not suit them.

99% of the time they get people to plead guilty and they don't have to break or rewrite any rules.

They take full advantage of the fact that most people are too poor to afford a defense that doesn't sport the same uniform as the opposing team. When the choices are go broke, get in debt, all to stay out of jail a couple months, or just serving the time and dealing will the smaller financial mess later, its not much of a choice.

 

[dreamache]

Actually 99% of the time they tow the line and follow the rules.

Holy shit you are sadly mistaken. Sister inlaw recently became a cop, said it's ridiculous how much they pull people over for no reason at all and just make shit up. I'd say more often than not, police are constantly breaking and bending laws, because why the fuck shouldn't they? They have a monopoly, and they're very rarely ever at risk of losing their job... One of the many perks working in a job funded by a constant, never ending flow of stolen money.

 

[REIMktg]

Why would I call the cops if there is a mob in my street? Or your reference to the L.A riots?
What would I possibly be telling the police that they don't already know?

Whatever. You know the point I was making. There is some use for the Govt. Could a private force do the same? Yes, maybe, but there would not be less corruption.

Maybe for a noise complaint. But not when someones life depends on them. Police are under no obligation to protect you from a threat, and you don't have to throw a stick very far to hear them make that statement.

Yet they protect people everyday.

99% of the time they get people to plead guilty and they don't have to break or rewrite any rules.

They take full advantage of the fact that most people are too poor to afford a defense that doesn't sport the same uniform as the opposing team. When the choices are go broke, get in debt, all to stay out of jail a couple months, or just serving the time and dealing will the smaller financial mess later, its not much of a choice.

Yes I am fully aware of prosecutorial misconduct and I find the tricks that can be played despicable. Yet most are guilty and few are not. I'm not a Police apologist but I believe there is more recourse with Govt Police than Anarchist security forces.

Should I trust Anarchist rule more than Govt? I do not think so.

Same crap would be happening - each to serve their own interest. I'd probably end up in some Green Anarchist's prison for driving too much - after all - each Anarchist can make his own rules right? and who would be there to stop him?

 

[dreamache]

Whatever. You know the point I was making. There is some use for the Govt. Could a private force do the same? Yes, maybe, but there would not be less corruption.




Yet they protect people everyday.



Yes I am fully aware of prosecutorial misconduct and I find the tricks that can be played despicable. Yet most are guilty and few are not. I'm not a Police apologist but I believe there is more recourse with Govt Police than Anarchist security forces.

Should I trust Anarchist rule more than Govt? I do not think so.

Same crap would be happening - each to serve their own interest. I'd probably end up in some Green Anarchist's prison for driving too much - after all - each Anarchist can make his own rules right? and who would be there to stop him?

There's no such thing as "Anarchist rule", the definition of anarchy is without rulers.

So instead of government sponsored monopolies on services like security/police force, you have free market driven competition which *always* fuels better quality products/services.

To me it's so simple. Remove competition and you remove the incentive to create a great service, you remove accountability. This is what we have in public services. Just look at how fucking pathetic public education is and how fucking illiterate students are, just do a google search showing all the new videos and news of police misconduct, it's mind blowing at how inefficient and fucked up these government services are... and it's even more mind blowing that some people defend it.

 

[REIMktg]

Holy shit you are sadly mistaken. Sister inlaw recently became a cop, said it's ridiculous how much they pull people over for no reason at all and just make shit up. I'd say more often than not, police are constantly breaking and bending laws, because why the fuck shouldn't they? They have a monopoly, and they're very rarely ever at risk of losing their job... One of the many perks working in a job funded by a constant, never ending flow of stolen money.

I agree they should not pull people over like they do - I have been pulled over many times. This reminds me to let all the minorities know that White people are pulled over for no reason also - If I was a minority, I may be inclined to call it racist. But it happens to everyone.

Cops for the most part follow the rules. It is the rare occasion when they charge and convict the innocent. For every case you hear about there are hundreds that are by the book.

If your Sister in-law is a party to illegal activity then the burden is on her to correct the situation. Of course she'll probably just join the "Team" because it is an easier path. This is what I fear with Anarchy. Too many followers and too few leaders.

 

[REIMktg]

There's no such thing as "Anarchist rule", the definition of anarchy is without rulers.

So instead of government sponsored monopolies on services like security/police force, you have free market driven competition which *always* fuels better quality products/services.

To me it's so simple. Remove competition and you remove the incentive to create a great service, you remove accountability. This is what we have in public services. Just look at how fucking pathetic public education is and how fucking illiterate students are, just do a google search showing all the new videos and news of police misconduct, it's mind blowing at how inefficient and fucked up these government services are... and it's even more mind blowing that some people defend it.

With the power of propaganda there is no way to ensure "perfect information" nor ease of entry and exit therefore the free market argument does not work.

 

[scottspfd82]

Whatever. You know the point I was making. There is some use for the Govt. Could a private force do the same? Yes, maybe, but there would not be less corruption.

You don't think there'd be less corruption when people have a choice and not a monopoly over security?

Yet they protect people everyday.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A05_dXTnltk]Columbia Missouri SWAT Raid - YouTube[/ame]

That's a much more common occurrence than most realize. If they didn't make it their business to kick in doors with a shoot to kill mentality over suspected possession of a fucking plant that shit wouldn't happen.

Should I trust Anarchist rule more than Govt? I do not think so.

You don't trust people yet you trust giving people the monopoly on violence.

each Anarchist can make his own rules right?

No.

 

[Napolean]

Whatever. You know the point I was making. There is some use for the Govt. Could a private force do the same? Yes, maybe, but there would not be less corruption.

When you have a monopoly on a good or service, you don't have to concern yourself over competition doing a better job than you and your customers flocking to the better provider.

To say that a monopoly would have less corruption than a competitive market is kind of like asking "why go to that candy store like a chump when there is a van across the street that advertises free candy, albeit crudely spray painted on the door"?

Yet they protect people everyday.

Regular people protect each other every day, badge or no badge. I'd say more often its normal people risking their lives to save another.

Yes I am fully aware of prosecutorial misconduct and I find the tricks that can be played despicable. Yet most are guilty and few are not. I'm not a Police apologist but I believe there is more recourse with Govt Police than Anarchist security forces.

Most are "guilty" of victim-less crimes which makes them not guilty at all. They shouldn't be in court to begin with, and they shouldn't have been arrested to begin with.

Should I trust Anarchist rule more than Govt? I do not think so.

A bit of an oxymoron there.

Same crap would be happening - each to serve their own interest. I'd probably end up in some Green Anarchist's prison for driving too much - after all - each Anarchist can make his own rules right? and who would be there to stop him?

Wrong. The concept of anarchy is that no one imposes their beliefs on each other.

Why do you think so many are atheists?

Many of us even go so far as to consider statism a religion, that many "religious" don't even realize they worship and even put above their own religious beliefs.

 

[REIMktg]

You don't think there'd be less corruption when people have a choice and not a monopoly over security?

How would that choice work. I mean really, how do you think you will be able to determine and implement adequate security on an individual basis?

Columbia Missouri SWAT Raid - YouTube

That's a much more common occurrence than most realize. If they didn't make it their business to kick in doors with a shoot to kill mentality over suspected possession of a fucking plant that shit wouldn't happen.

First, I know Shit Happens. No kidding. But why should I believe it would happen less under Anarchy?

You don't trust people yet you trust giving people the monopoly on violence.

There are multiple Enforcement agencies all watching each other. You want to see some crap happen? Go to some countries where there is only 1 true monopolistic Police force. That's frightening.

No.

Then clearly I do not understand the basics of Anarchy. Because everything I have read here, including LukeP's books on the subject linked in a previous thread seem fanciful and full of pie in the sky reliance on some sort of perfect information and choice where each person makes their own choices and yet all of these organizations will be crossing jurisdictions. Plus what happens when a crazy Anarchist decides I am polluting his air or water or whatever. He comes over and hauls me into his jail. When everyone else says, hey, you can't do that, then we have a problem. Who decides what? Oh, is there now going to be an Anarchist arbitration association? You see, people do not get along and a lot of people are simply crazy. Anarchy cannot work - someone, please someone, show me something that I can read that would explain the basics of how it could.

 

[scottspfd82]

Anarchy cannot work - someone, please someone, show me something that I can read that would explain the basics of how it could.

Freedomain Radio > Free Books

"Everyday Anarchy" and "Practical Anarchy" are quick reads/a decent place to start.

 

[scottspfd82]

But why should I believe it would happen less under Anarchy?

Because no individual without Government has anything to gain from the genocide of 500,000 children - and then saying "It's worth it".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4]The Road to World War 3 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[REIMktg]

When you have a monopoly on a good or service, you don't have to concern yourself over competition doing a better job than you and your customers flocking to the better provider.

To say that a monopoly would have less corruption than a competitive market is kind of like asking "why go to that candy store like a chump when there is a van across the street that advertises free candy, albeit crudely spray painted on the door"?

How easy is it to make candy versus start a Security force, jails, and trained personnel? So how many entrants will there be? How will I know about this new force? How will I know they are better? At best there would be limited choices of a few security forces who would be sabotaging each other to make themselves look better. How can you not see the potential for corruption. It's no better than a Govt force held accountable by other jurisdictional agencies and civilian oversight. Why do you think the same lazy citizens in our current system will all of the sudden be diligent in selecting a new force? The incumbent would probably be selected over and over. How is that better.

Free markets are not to be worshiped. They are the best system, but you need to understand their limitations.

Regular people protect each other every day, badge or no badge. I'd say more often its normal people risking their lives to save another.

I doubt that.

Most are "guilty" of victim-less crimes which makes them not guilty at all. They shouldn't be in court to begin with, and they shouldn't have been arrested to begin with.

It is not victimless. If it were legal it might be more victimless, but since it is illegal it is full of victims. Investigate the Mexican Cartels. There are victims. Drug users are not any more innocent than the Govt they despise for going to war. Seems like all of them are killing people in other countries.

A bit of an oxymoron there.
Wrong.
The concept of anarchy is that no one imposes their beliefs on each other.

Maybe, but still true. I have more recourse with the Govt than I will against some Anarchist tribunal made up of those that disagree with something, anything that I am doing. You say that no one intrudes on others? What happens then when I divert water to my new lake on my property and mess up your irrigation downstream? What happens when I ride my motorcycle at 5AM in my front yard and you want to sleep? Ther are a million stupid yet simple examples of how Anarchists will never get along.

Why do you think so many are atheists?

Many of us even go so far as to consider statism a religion, that many "religious" don't even realize they worship and even put above their own religious beliefs.

I think you are an atheist because you believe in and trust "Man". You do not understand that "Man" is inherently evil and cannot be trusted. You're in some dream world that believes that somehow man can get along if it were not for Govt. Yet Man left to his own measures never has.

You worship the free market and Man as much as Religionists worship their God or "Way". Anarchy puts their trust in Man. Is there any historical evidence that this works out? Just as with the Relighious - there are too many religions and none get along. Same with Anarchy, too many little Gods (each Man) and none will get along.

 

[REIMktg]

Because no individual without Government has anything to gain from the genocide of 500,000 children - and then saying "It's worth it".

Open your eyes. There are many who believe killing hundreds of millions would help "heal" the planet. They have no problem with genocide for the sake of Nature.

You are dead wrong on this.

 

[scottspfd82]

Open your eyes. There are many who believe killing hundreds of millions would help "heal" the planet. They have no problem with genocide for the sake of Nature.

You are dead wrong on this.

Am I? What individual has ever committed genocide? If you say Hitler, that was a STATE. No individual can pull it off of they wanted to. And war isn't profitable when it's not funded from stealing from the population.

EDIT:There's no way you watched that video in the time between our posts.

 

[nibes18]

NO WAY!

all you're telling is not that relevant. it doesn't work that way.

 

[pizora]

I am a fresher here.