Convince me government is moral.

[Viker]

I have seen this assertion that a free market society is an authoritarian state. This does not make sense to me. Society would be based on freedom of association. I dont see where I'm talking about authoritarian overreaching, I'm talking about the complete opposite. Enlighten me

Your confusing basic governance/government with all forms of tyranny. That's what I meant. No anarchist has ever been able to provide an example of how we can manage a society/economy without it coming in to government or even statehood. It just doesn't have to be cold or brutal is what I am saying.

 

[Viker]

I get food stamps haha. A bit hypocritical, but a mans gotta eat.

Refreshing honesty.

 

[Secret Chief]

The roads, firemen and, most important of all, the rule of law, are not tangential. They are at the heart of the reasons for government. Any club or society, of whatever kind, needs rules. Think about it.

I've never met an anarchist that's organised the building and fitting out of a hospital.

 

[Secret Chief]

I get food stamps haha. A bit hypocritical, but a mans gotta eat.

So you've fatally undermined your own argument right there.

 

[Heyo]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government can be moral, especially forms of democracy like a direct democracy.
The problem isn't that a government can't be moral, the problem is that it tends to become immoral (corrupt), especially in governments with representation.
But even a direct democracy can have (and usually has) elements of suppression, like the "dictatorship of the masses", police and taxes. You need a very moral people to have a moral government. But then again, you need moral people to have a functioning anarchy that doesn't sink into chaos.

 

[Heyo]

Even the rules of this forum are a form of governance. A government is like our mods and admins. No difference.

The rules are not governance, the mods are.
You can have (and need to have) rules in an anarchy. Anarchy isn't lawlessness, it is the absence of a ruler.

 

[Estro Felino]

Because the State prevents the wealthy from oppressing the weakest.
It's like the protector of the most humble.
A very efficient defender.

Because the wealthy do want to exploit the weakest.
That's why they hate the State (or the Government) because the State prevents them from being unruly.

There you go...easy as pie.

 

[Estro Felino]

Government can be moral, especially forms of democracy like a direct democracy.
The problem isn't that a government can't be moral, the problem is that it tends to become immoral (corrupt), especially in governments with representation.
But even a direct democracy can have (and usually has) elements of suppression, like the "dictatorship of the masses", police and taxes. You need a very moral people to have a moral government. But then again, you need moral people to have a functioning anarchy that doesn't sink into chaos.

Western democracies are based upon trust.
Optimism and trust. We need to trust our representatives first, otherwise we cannot trust one another and not even ourselves.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system. I'm sure about this. My religious beliefs fluctuate. My political beliefs have too, but from a super statist (republican) to a mild statist (Libertarian) and then finally to an anarchist. My political beliefs evolved away from statism.

To be a statist is to hold a view of any government system as legitimate.

So essentially everyone on this site except @Heyo and @syo (your an anarchist, right syo? I think I remember right). Any other anarchists here?

Don't get me wrong, anarchism isn't some small movement. The government would like you to think the anarchist movement is small, and don't even want you to know about it.

Anywho it seems like 99% of the world are statists. Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists. An obvious example is the pledge of allegiance every day in public school.

So, I am in the minority here. I'm open to being wrong. I really am. So, convince me that a form of government could be a moral system.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property. No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property. A state is merely individuals, bandits if you will.

And, by the way, all goods and services can be provided in the absence of a state. There would still be roads and firemen. That's a tangent though.

Government would not be moral if humans didn’t behave like little, orphaned boys in a sand-pit; but they do, so they need a step-parent to stop them from lynching each other.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[PureX]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

The purpose of government is not to be moral. The purpose of government is to be functional. It's job is to facilitate and safeguard the well-being of everyone it purports to serve.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It can work just fine for smaller societies, but as a society grows in size and complexity so does the need to formally organize society.

You must mean by "formally organize society", it's actually authoritarianism and strong centralized government to control the masses

 

[Stevicus]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system. I'm sure about this. My religious beliefs fluctuate. My political beliefs have too, but from a super statist (republican) to a mild statist (Libertarian) and then finally to an anarchist. My political beliefs evolved away from statism.

To be a statist is to hold a view of any government system as legitimate.

So essentially everyone on this site except @Heyo and @syo (your an anarchist, right syo? I think I remember right). Any other anarchists here?

Don't get me wrong, anarchism isn't some small movement. The government would like you to think the anarchist movement is small, and don't even want you to know about it.

Anywho it seems like 99% of the world are statists. Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists. An obvious example is the pledge of allegiance every day in public school.

So, I am in the minority here. I'm open to being wrong. I really am. So, convince me that a form of government could be a moral system.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property. No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property. A state is merely individuals, bandits if you will.

And, by the way, all goods and services can be provided in the absence of a state. There would still be roads and firemen. That's a tangent though.

Anarchism might have been workable in more primitive, less complex times. But even then, no one is ever really just "an individual," since people are born into families and clans. Humans are a social animal. But we're still animals in that we can be predatory, yet have an instinct to procreate and care for our young, just as any animal. When humans started farming, the "state" (in a more primitive form) came about because parents wanted to ensure their children would inherit their land so they would have the means for survival and continue the bloodline.

If you already have a concept of "property" and "contracts," and all families within a given community agree as to whose property is whose, then (ta-da!) you've already got yourself a "state." It wouldn't necessarily have a large or intrusive government, which might amount to nothing more than a council of tribal elders, but it wouldn't be anarchism either.

 

[Kenny]

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system.

Government is made up of people. Anarchism is made up of people.

Both involve people

People can be either immoral or moral, so it just depends who is leading the pack.

 

[Audie]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system. I'm sure about this. My religious beliefs fluctuate. My political beliefs have too, but from a super statist (republican) to a mild statist (Libertarian) and then finally to an anarchist. My political beliefs evolved away from statism.

To be a statist is to hold a view of any government system as legitimate.

So essentially everyone on this site except @Heyo and @syo (your an anarchist, right syo? I think I remember right). Any other anarchists here?

Don't get me wrong, anarchism isn't some small movement. The government would like you to think the anarchist movement is small, and don't even want you to know about it.

Anywho it seems like 99% of the world are statists. Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists. An obvious example is the pledge of allegiance every day in public school.

So, I am in the minority here. I'm open to being wrong. I really am. So, convince me that a form of government could be a moral system.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property. No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property. A state is merely individuals, bandits if you will.

And, by the way, all goods and services can be provided in the absence of a state. There would still be roads and firemen. That's a tangent though.

Eze peezy.

Sometimes it is and others it ain't.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Oh, that's easy enough. Just look at somewhere like the Islamic Republic of Iran. Totes moral, and includes substantial oversight and representation from theological representatives to ensure that's the case.

Now, if you ask me, that's a horrendous system, but that wasn't your question, so...

 

[sayak83]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system. I'm sure about this. My religious beliefs fluctuate. My political beliefs have too, but from a super statist (republican) to a mild statist (Libertarian) and then finally to an anarchist. My political beliefs evolved away from statism.

To be a statist is to hold a view of any government system as legitimate.

So essentially everyone on this site except @Heyo and @syo (your an anarchist, right syo? I think I remember right). Any other anarchists here?

Don't get me wrong, anarchism isn't some small movement. The government would like you to think the anarchist movement is small, and don't even want you to know about it.

Anywho it seems like 99% of the world are statists. Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists. An obvious example is the pledge of allegiance every day in public school.

So, I am in the minority here. I'm open to being wrong. I really am. So, convince me that a form of government could be a moral system.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property. No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property. A state is merely individuals, bandits if you will.

And, by the way, all goods and services can be provided in the absence of a state. There would still be roads and firemen. That's a tangent though.

A council of 5 tribal elders in a 50 people nomadic hunter gatherer tribe in Amazon rainforest is also a government.
So...I have no idea what anarchism is.

 

[PureX]

A council of 5 tribal elders in a 50 people nomadic hunter gatherer tribe in Amazon rainforest is also a government.
So...I have no idea what anarchism is.

The moment "anarchy" occurs, the bullyboys will pop up and start ordering everyone to do their bidding. And they will become the new method of social governance. "Anarchy" can only exist for a very short time. It's simply not a function of human nature.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Governments are political bodies and they have their problems (like terrorism in India or pseudosocialists/communists who try to stop any development work). It is unfair to expect morality from them. Not even from Modi in India.

 

[joe1776]

TLDR: convince me a government could be a moral system.

Government is immoral. Anarchism is the only moral system. I'm sure about this. My religious beliefs fluctuate. My political beliefs have too, but from a super statist (republican) to a mild statist (Libertarian) and then finally to an anarchist. My political beliefs evolved away from statism.

To be a statist is to hold a view of any government system as legitimate.

So essentially everyone on this site except @Heyo and @syo (your an anarchist, right syo? I think I remember right). Any other anarchists here?

Don't get me wrong, anarchism isn't some small movement. The government would like you to think the anarchist movement is small, and don't even want you to know about it.

Anywho it seems like 99% of the world are statists. Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists. An obvious example is the pledge of allegiance every day in public school.

So, I am in the minority here. I'm open to being wrong. I really am. So, convince me that a form of government could be a moral system.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property. No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property. A state is merely individuals, bandits if you will.

And, by the way, all goods and services can be provided in the absence of a state. There would still be roads and firemen. That's a tangent though.

I disagree, Xavier

You are being misled by the fact that we humans have yet to invent an efficient government, one that makes all the right decisions and is free of corruption.

A society is a cooperative endeavor. Its goal should be to make it easier for cooperative citizens to survive and thrive. To do that the effort has to be governed.

If the government is top notch in decision-making, it should have the power to implement those decisions throughout the nation. The hierarchy is a necessary power tool.

As a cooperative citizen, it's necessary for you to trade-in some individual rights for the greater benefits you will receive. That trade-in is the essence of cooperation.

 

[mangalavara]

Every single government indoctrinates their populace to be statists.

It is good to remind people of what they have so that they may appreciate it.

I say it is immoral because the existence of a state entails people having control over me and my property.

You can do almost anything you want to do with your body, property, and possessions.

No one, even if they claim to be a state, has a right over my body or property.

Imagine if the state had nothing to do with robbers, rapists, murderers, and collections of machine guns and explosives.

There would be competing arbiters that both parties can agree to go to in the case of a dispute through a contract. Private judges, police, and private laws, try to wrap your head around that!

Why should I honor the private judge whom you hire? I could pay more to hire a private judge who will rule in my favor.

There are rules in an anarchist society. Government isn't a necessary prerequisite.

Somebody has to write and conduct the rules in a society. Somebody who does that is somebody who governs by definition.