You guys are right

Humans are quite capable of communism - that is what primitive tribal societies practice. They have been wiped out over time by technologically superior individualistic societies that saw the advantages in an individualistic society. It was a long, slow process, and it needed a starting point.

The first pure free market society will likewise wipe out all political societies.

  1. How can you be more or less human than me? It’s not possible. We’re all humans. You seem to think you’re special. I don’t think you are. I think you would throw away your moral code at the drop of a hat if you thought it was in your interest to do so.

  2. Of course I’m an animal. Humans are animals. We come from nature. What do you think we come from? Clouds? I’m just an animal with a big brain. But fear works as well on me or you as it would on a dog or a cat.

  3. I never said equal. I said same. We’re all built the same way. Whatever differences there are between us are minimal. Which means there are certain things we all have in common. Socialism is the idea that all areas of government are best managed centrally. I’m not a socialist. By the way, what did you go to jail for? I’m just curious, you don’t have to tell me.

  4. It won’t be me who comes and takes everything from your anarchist region. But if I am one of them, I’ll keep in mind that some of you know how to use a gun.

That being said, I respect myself because I know how powerful I can become, how capable I am of learning and developing my own ideas. I respect my own power and my own ability. Morals are…negotiable. The only thing I respect about morality is how easily some people are tricked into believing it protects them.

  1. The relevance is that for your private system to work, you’ll need to be able to handle that many cases. The IJC, a private court, has barely been able to handle 100 cases since 1945 and it does a lousy job at it. If your system isn’t prepared to conclusively deal with millions of cases a year, it won’t work. By conclusively, I mean that the decisions that are reached are final and upheld. Who is going to uphold justice if everyone can just go to a different court?

You are forgetting something here. What is the difference between communist societies that work and communist societies that don’t?

What will be the difference between anarchist regions that work and anarchist regions that don’t?

I’ll give you a hint, it’s the same difference.

You really are a horrible proponent of anarchy. You are acidic and accosting and bitter. Your hatred shows through in all your responses. And it’s precisely that sort of misanthropic tendency that anarchy seems to most strongly produce: an in-group out-group phenomenon that will certainly give way to the same sort of fundamentalism that extremist sects of Islam are so given to. You will become a terrorist group that justifies its actions by making dissenters “morons, slavers and slaver morons.”

First of all, you don’t have to pay. But if you don’t want to pay, you can kindly leave.

Galt left. He didn’t like the system so he left it. You have the same ability. You refuse to use it.

Whatever I am is exactly what you will have a hard time dealing with in your society. And I’m mild.

What did you go to prison for Felker?

Where was your morality? Why didn’t it stop you?

Wrong.

Good judgement is the process of aiming and hitting the target. Judgement is morality.

There are no communist societies that don’t work. Communism simply locks society into primitivism.

So does statism.

no…
i know its not immoral to be a moron, it only makes for poor debate.

slavery on the other hand is abhorrent. and you are an advocate for this slavery.

im supposedly "overly acidic and accosting and bitter" because; you are a slaver, and i tell you that, without sparing your precious feelings?

get real buddy

if you dont like being called a slaver, because you think theres something wrong (immoral) about slavery, then stop advocating slavery. or else put up with it.

if you dont like being called a moron, try arguing the points that you pretend to want to argue. (economics for a hint)

if you dont like being called a slaver moron, ask me to ban you.

I see you are threatening.

Jacob’s not here to learn. Jacob is here to cause trouble.

What if I judge it’s good to kill you? And I think it’s moral to do so because I believe your ideas will eventually become terrorism which will endanger the lives of others? Would I not be moral to eliminate you? Or vice versa. What if you thought those things of me?

I am here to learn, but not here to complacently agree. I’m not a cow, I will not be led carelessly into your philosophy without LEARNING what it’s really about.

Well he is incontinent so he might ask if he wakes up and realizes how out of control he really is.

Admit that you have done a poor job of presenting your ideas, and I will ask you to ban me.

Also, you didn’t answer my questions about the courts, why not?

Communist China fell apart, why? Communist Russia fell apart, why? What was the difference? Everything falls apart eventually, but these failures were monumental. Why? What’s the difference??

As I told you before Jacob, anarchic systems exist everywhere. People choose anarchy every time they act w/o a specific, centralized authority. As you have said, people act irrationally, that is why they allow the state to persist, irrational thought processes. Humanity rolled the dice, we rolled bad.

Also, as we’ve said before, anarchic societies HAVE existed, and done so for long periods of time. People HAVE chosen anarchy.

THe only reason that the state has a chance is because people sold it.

I think you are incontinent because you rely on an overrationalized set of values that you claim to be absolute that will crumble eventually. When that happens, you will be totally and utterly out of control.

Communist China did not fall apart. It reformed.

Russia was socialist, not communist. It was only as communist as it was democratic.

Knowing these differences is the key to understanding economics and the functions of the market society. You have a long way to go.

The aim is happiness. How is murdering somebody hitting the aim of happiness?

A. You only happy: 1+0=1

B. You and victim happy: 1=1=2

B’s aim is better. It’s that logical.

That’s illogical. First you would have to have good understanding. Understanding is morality. To be able to aim and hit the target a person needs good judgement and good understanding. Judgement and Understanding are morality. Judgement is about what choice to make. Understanding is about the choices judgement will choose from. Aim - Target. You lack this and that’s why you’re being considered illogical.

Where have they existed? What happened to them?

Is it possible that the irrational component of humanity is in fact the marginal fringe of people who believe in things that obviously don’t work? Perhaps you are being totally irrational in your evaluations because you are letting your desire for a perfect world slip into practical philosophy?

Is it possible that the state sold because people wanted it? And still want it?