Jump to content

Hitler: Democratic Dictator


Recommended Posts

Again, I know I waste my time asking for a source - you never have one.

The source for information on India and South America is very readily available to you, Hugo. Just get your eyes adjusted to something other than the snow blindness of Iceland and look at the real world. All that in economic matters is there to be seen daily.

I'll take that as a "no", then. Thanks for admitting you were wasting my time. I can now happily ignore you, knowing that my arguments are no weaker for so doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What is at issue is the extreme view which you take where you insist that there is never a need for a group of people to collectively manage some of the things that affect their lives.
I never said anything of the sort. There are a great many mechanisms and institutions for people to take collective action. The free market is, in fact, the greatest and most efficient method yet discovered for people to take collective action, but there are also companies, families, charities, churches, clubs, unions, etc.

What I reject is the only collective institution that uses coercion and violence as its sole tools: government.

When a bank repossesses a car, how is that not an act of violence? Violence is frequently threatened or used between married people. A church that threatens damnation for all eternity can hardly be characterized as not coercive. And many people dread going to work, feeling "coerced" and regretting career choices made years before.

These are all examples of fulfilling the terms of a contract, but I think the true issue here is why are there contracts with unspecified terms. Can such an agreement even be called a "contract"?

I will even go further: the government we have in Canada works just like one big corporation where we as a society have given a exclusive contract to for the provision of certain services.
If we can grant that contract, then that assumes "we" also own everything and everyone since you can't make an agreement over something that isn't yours. How does that work? Do I own one thirty-millionth of you? In which case, nobody could take any kind of action, because you would only own one-thirty-millionth of yourself and you'd need to take a referendum for approval to use the bathroom or blow your nose.
Hugo, you always resort to this argument when someone suggests that government is an "association".

Let me repeat this critical sentence: "you can't make an agreement over something that isn't yours". Well, yes you can. We frequently sign contracts in which the terms are undefined, subject to future "negotiation".

I lease a car and agree to monthly payments of $400 during the 3-year life of the lease. If I don't pay, the car is repossessed.

Now, imagine leasing a car where the payments next year are unspecified - or subject to future negotiation. If the payments next year rise to $800, what does that mean? Does the lessor "own" a portion of the lessee? Or if the payments fall to $200, does the lessee "own" a portion of the lessor?

The interesting question is why anyone would agree to lease a car by such a contract.

Hugo, rather than blame government for all the ills of the world, it might be more interesting to ask why anyone would ever sign a marriage contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

The most amazing thing about Hitler's rise to power and ensuing carnage on the world is that he did it in plain sight. He wrote a book (Mein Kempf) telling the world what he would do. Then he went and accomplished it. After it was done people around the world were wondering how did this happen.

This same thing is happening todayman never learns. History is once again repeating itself, but no one is paying attention. All the signs are there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most amazing thing about Hitler's rise to power  and ensuing carnage on the world is that he did it in plain sight. He wrote a book (Mein Kempf) telling the world what he would do. Then he went and accomplished it. After it was done people around the world were wondering how did this happen.

This same thing is happening todayman never learns. History is once again repeating itself, but no one is paying attention. All the signs are there.

Nah, I don't think Gerhard Schroder is such a bad guy.

What's that? You're not talking about Germany? Well, whoever could you be talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed that the first time around.

When a bank repossesses a car, how is that not an act of violence?

It is, but it's not an act of coercion. Can you tell the difference?

A church that threatens damnation for all eternity can hardly be characterized as not coercive.

It's a threat that they, themselves, are powerless to carry out. They rely on retribution from a being never proven to exist in a form never proven to exist either. I don't think it's coercive at all. "Live free from sin, or suffer the consequences!" How is that different from "eat vitamins or suffer the consequences!" - except that the consequences of malnutrition are actually proven? Are vitamin vendors coercive?

And many people dread going to work, feeling "coerced" and regretting career choices made years before.

It's within their power to change them. For whatever reason, a person who hates their job but keeps doing it has made a judgement that changing jobs is worse than doing their current one.

These are all examples of fulfilling the terms of a contract, but I think the true issue here is why are there contracts with unspecified terms. Can such an agreement even be called a "contract"?

The "unspecified terms" in this case are hardly analogous to the social contract myth, which consists of entirely unspecified terms between unspecified parties without any consent whatsoever.

Now, imagine leasing a car where the payments next year are unspecified - or subject to future negotiation... The interesting question is why anyone would agree to lease a car by such a contract.

Variable rate mortgage. Next question.

Hugo, rather than blame government for all the ills of the world, it might be more interesting to ask why anyone would ever sign a marriage contract.

Just forget about it. You're never going to turn marriage into an analogy for government no matter how much you wish you could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed that the first time around.
Thanks for the resurrection. Maybe a new thread is in order.
When a bank repossesses a car, how is that not an act of violence?
It is, but it's not an act of coercion. Can you tell the difference?
It all depends on "ownership", and what that means.

According to Hugo, the bank is fairly taking possession of something it owns. According to me, the bank is making future loans possible.

Can you tell the difference?

It's a threat that they, themselves, are powerless to carry out. They rely on retribution from a being never proven to exist in a form never proven to exist either. I don't think it's coercive at all. "Live free from sin, or suffer the consequences!" How is that different from "eat vitamins or suffer the consequences!" - except that the consequences of malnutrition are actually proven? Are vitamin vendors coercive?
Dumb, dumb, dumb. Misses the point.

Powerless to carry out? Ostracism was the power of religion. Hugo, you have posted frequently about private rules. Welcome to excommunication.

Vitamins? Science as a modern religion: "Eat your vegetables, they're good for you." Well, uninformed science. True science is sceptical.

And many people dread going to work, feeling "coerced" and regretting career choices made years before.
It's within their power to change them. For whatever reason, a person who hates their job but keeps doing it has made a judgement that changing jobs is worse than doing their current one.
I agree with you Hugo. Yet many people stay in jobs they hate, and stay married to people they hate. Presumably, because the alternative is worse.

The true question is: why do people decide today to accept a job, marry a person knowing well that they are locking themselves in? Why make now such future decisions? Why such "contracts"? Why not wait and see?

Now, imagine leasing a car where the payments next year are unspecified - or subject to future negotiation... The interesting question is why anyone would agree to lease a car by such a contract.
Variable rate mortgage. Next question.
Variable rate mortgages have precise future terms of negotiation. More fundamentally, why not "variable rate" marriage contracts?
You're never going to turn marriage into an analogy for government no matter how much you wish you could.
Hugo, in life, people deal with one another - in markets, in families, in partnerships. (BTW, the Earth "deals" with the Sun and the Moon. The Universe is all about relations, bonds.)

Marriage and government? How about alimony and tax?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Hugo, the bank is fairly taking possession of something it owns. According to me, the bank is making future loans possible.

Yes, but there is all sorts of rubbish propounded here "according to you." "Making future loans possible" is just doublespeak.

Powerless to carry out? Ostracism was the power of religion. Hugo, you have posted frequently about private rules. Welcome to excommunication.

Vitamins? Science as a modern religion: "Eat your vegetables, they're good for you." Well, uninformed science. True science is sceptical.

So how is any of this coercive, exactly? You are taking an example of a group that asks you to do action A, otherwise unpleasant circumstance B will be visited upon you by C, a force outside their or your control.

You equate this to a group that asks you to do action A otherwise they will personally visit unpleasant circumstance B upon you.

Examples: take your vitamins, or you'll get sick. Give me your money, or I'll break your kneecaps.

The true question is: why do people decide today to accept a job, marry a person knowing well that they are locking themselves in? Why make now such future decisions? Why such "contracts"? Why not wait and see?

You're asking the wrong man. Ask them. All human behaviour is rational behaviour, since rationality is subjective and what a person is doing invariably makes sense at least to them.

Variable rate mortgages have precise future terms of negotiation. More fundamentally, why not "variable rate" marriage contracts?

Indeed, why not? What's stopping that? (Hint: starts with "S" and ends with "ate").

Hugo, in life, people deal with one another - in markets, in families, in partnerships.

Yes, they do.

BTW, the Earth "deals" with the Sun and the Moon.

No, it doesn't.

Marriage and government? How about alimony and tax?

Alimony is agreed upon. Taxes are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most amazing thing about Hitler's rise to power  and ensuing carnage on the world is that he did it in plain sight. He wrote a book (Mein Kempf) telling the world what he would do. Then he went and accomplished it. After it was done people around the world were wondering how did this happen.

This same thing is happening todayman never learns. History is once again repeating itself, but no one is paying attention. All the signs are there.

Nah, I don't think Gerhard Schroder is such a bad guy.

What's that? You're not talking about Germany? Well, whoever could you be talking about?

Germany has no world domination aspirations. There time has come and gone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,767
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    rosebella
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...