RE: If Case Of An Emergency, This Is What You Do
Luckily I didn't had to go through the part about truth and lies. If it doesn't serve my life, it's not worth bothering about. I had plenty of books and magazines to read and there were movies, X-Files, few cartoons and later Internet.
Since I was a kid I was never a fan of democracy. I was one of the smarter kids in the class. So I could never wrap my head around how a majority decision would be good while I (and few others) score far better than the rest. How come Arthur C Clerk and some guy who failed 8th grade have the same say in a matter? (I was a big fan of Clerk. I started with 3001 while i was 5th grade or something)
I never had any interest or respect for politics until I came across the quote on the right to swing your stick thanks to a history teacher teaching us the French Revolution and I was like: "Finally someone gets it. Why isn't this a thing yet? Why can't we build the society based on that single quote???.......And eventually I came to know that reality is a stupid brutal thing that doesn't act sensibly and many things kept stacking up until I gave up school and slept through my exams.
I fully support voluntaryism, by doing that you can get around democracy which is not real anyways.
A famous swedish writer (Wilhelm Moberg) used this expression called "apparant democracy" in the sixties. Here is the definition:
Democracy refers to a society which is a democracy to the surface, but which in practice lacks real and widespread freedom of speech , which lacks the opportunity for dissenting political groups to bring their action on an equal footing, which lacks a fully legal and legal system (where laws and rules are applied and applied differently depending on what political camp or other arbitrary collective man belongs to), where they risk losing their jobs for their opinions, where, as a dissenting group, they are at risk of being subjected to political violence by political opponents (and there The state looks between the fingers with this). Another feature of a democracy is when the laws are not enforced (by the state itself).
It is amazingly customized for the Swedish society 60 years later, quite interesting.
I havent heard about "right to swing your stick" but in what context would you use it?
That's a very good cause. Personally I like to keep things very simple(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor). Here is a quote from one of my old posts:
You can read the full post here:https://steemit.com/steemit/@vimukthi/a-philosophical-and-economic-outlook-at-steemit-sbd-and-flagging-and-suggestions-for-a-better-future-based-on-positive
Basically "right to swing your stick" means anything that isn't bad is permitted. What is bad is the first violation of NAP.
Yeah, I tend to agree with the Non agression prinicple. However, you say that we should focus on preventing a crime which is good, but some people will commit crimes anyways. Are you saying that they should just get away with stealing a horse?
Please read this: https://steemit.com/philosophy/@vimukthi/what-is-law-what-is-justice-the-case-for-radical-violence-and-separation-of-law-and-morality
Your question almost became the reason to write it.
I read your piece, its a good one, and most of it makes sense but lets say you know who stole your horse (and he lives nearby) from the stable, what would you do then? Would you confront him about it or just forget about it? Or will there be a court system for this?
Second question, when you say that the majority can be learned to not commit crimes by prevention. It sounds good and all, but how would this be done? Parenting is enough, or more is needed?
I did another post touching the subject. I'll also be making a part 3 in the next few days: https://steemit.com/philosophy/@vimukthi/government-as-a-service-a-new-perspective-on-governments-and-taking-the-best-of-the-two-worlds-of-anarchy-and-minarchy
Great, i will check it out