"There has never been true communism."

[henry quirk]

"history does not run on rails"

had to do my bookwork...I get it...and you're right: ain't no guarantees about tomorrow...some clever bastard could develop soma, addict the world, reduce man to automaton...some smarty-pants (lookin' at you, elon musk, with your neural link) could develop tech makin' it easy to edit behavior & drive and turn us all into good lil cogs...beer virus could mutate, becomin' captain trips; an asteroid might smite us; a real, all-out atomic exchange might happen; and on and on and on...

but, this is not a remarkable observation

most folks get: trends don't equate to certainties

still, seen over the long-haul, the move is away from mass slavery toward individual freedom

[henry quirk]

Nuh-uh.

yeah, that was helpful

[henry quirk]

If we have as our entire state apparatus, nothing but a minimal constabulary, a minimal court of last resort, and a minimal border patrol

not a state, and you forgot the most important one of the four


plus we have a law universally accepted by all that no man can be told what he must do with his own property (for enslavement of the property appears to be enslavement of the owner), then it is easy to work up a scenario in which an enthusiastic monopolist can do great harm to a society, and effectively relieve others of their property, while never exactly doing anything wrong.

you'll have to be specific cuz I'm not seein' such a scenario playin' out


Also, how exactly does debt and lending work in this thing of yours that isn't a system? I mean there's no bank regulator, no particular currency even, and presumably nothing to stop debtors skipping town other than some sort of revenge if they ever come back? Collateral requirements would need to be enormous. Serious market to be cornered by the unscrupulous there.

you want me to sketch out, in advance, how free people will choose to address debt and lending...in essence, you want me to draw up a system...I won't...a natural rights libertarian minarchy, as long as the three are abided, can tolerate a whole whack of different systems...a community of ancaps will surely handle such things differently than a community of wannabe commies...the real trick is how the ancaps and commies will transact, if they do...hard currency instead of scrip will help in that...folks like myself, avoid banks, preferrin' a hard exchange, upfront, no third party (I'd want gold, not i.o.u.s)

my point: free folks will figure out the details of transaction for themselves

[henry quirk]

Why?



the answer is obvious

Because some individuals are always going to be bossier than others. that has always been the case and probably always will be.

you're sayin' if folks weren't bossy there could be a true communism?

[henry quirk]

One : we are not actually hardwired to be universally altruistic

Two : communism doesnt work because people like to own stuff as Frank Zappa said

The first applies to true communism and the second applies to economic communism

You all know the difference so I dont need to tell you what it is

We are hardwired to be altruistic.
Amongst many other things.

obey your wirin': gimme your money

[henry quirk]

...I made the right choice to put you aside for a while

just that one post made me tired

I'm fortifyin' myself with vitamins and collard greens so -- down the road -- I can address your many concerns

gonna be a bit before I'm strong enough to stare into the abyss that is age, though, so: keep them comments, criticisms, and questions comin', and be patient

[henry quirk]

take these...

a man belongs to himself

a man has a right to his life, liberty, and property

a man's life, liberty, or property are only forfeit, in part or whole, when he knowingly, willingly, without just cause, deprives another, in part or whole, of life, liberty, or property

...as the concrete foundation for a nation

how many different kinds of social and economic organization can you come up with that abide the three?

[FlashDangerpants]

If we have as our entire state apparatus, nothing but a minimal constabulary, a minimal court of last resort, and a minimal border patrol

not a state, and you forgot the most important one of the four

When we are discussing chicks with dicks, you are all about calling things what they are. This thing has a military to protect its borders, a court to decree its laws, and police force to enforce them, it might not be much of a state, but it is a state.

plus we have a law universally accepted by all that no man can be told what he must do with his own property (for enslavement of the property appears to be enslavement of the owner), then it is easy to work up a scenario in which an enthusiastic monopolist can do great harm to a society, and effectively relieve others of their property, while never exactly doing anything wrong.

you'll have to be specific cuz I'm not seein' such a scenario playin' out

Let's say some guy, we'll call him FDP, comes into town with a bunch of money he has no need to explain in any way, and buys up the local electricity supply chain. He's bought it, fair and square, it's his. Next he buys a few more, maybe using profits from running his own utility better than the amateurs down the road do, this is very agreeable. So now he has a natural monopoly, but nobody has been ripped off, so everyone is happy. Then he doubles the prices because he has no competition, still nothing wrong. So the people in one town start to see their electric bills rising and they decide to invest in their own electricity generation company, all still fair. To get the investment for a capital intensive project such as creating a distribution grid for their new electric supply company (the other dude being under no obligation to rent out his distribution infrastructure) they must borrow heavily, at which point FDP finds out their plans. FP wishes to dissuade competition, he can't do anything about people all buying their own generators for home, but he doesn't want anyone getting in on the lucrative distribution market, so he does to things now.
1, He lets it be known that as there will soon be a new electric firm in town, he is going to redirect his investments and his electricty to other markets. The town which has not built its own power network yet now has no electricity at all, making people grumpy, but he is not doing anything to other people's poperty, he's only allocating his own resources as he sees fit.
2, He cuts the costs for electricity in the next town over by 90%, well below the cost of production both for his large enterprise and any small competitor. This means that any capital they borrowed for distribution to customers rather than shareholders in their own enterprise cannot be paid back, and guarantees bankruptcy for his upstart competitor.

When the town gives in and shuts down their own plans, and all the debtors do ... whatever happens to debtors in this sort of not state .... FDP now is at liberty to double prices again in order to recoup losses from his trade war. People who can't pay are at liberty to not have electricity, people who are ill disposed to FDP are at liberty to pay double again in order to run their own inefficient diesel generators or solar panels or what have you.

But most importantly, the lenders who lost the most money on ths gambit will now never bankroll another electricity generation startup within his territory. Everything has become less efficient now, with some people unable to consume a basic necessity at all, others buying redundant hardware and wasting fuel, while the majority are just spending more on electricity so less on other things. Meanwhile electricity dependent businesses are all looking to relocate somewhere more predictable.

With all the juicy profits locked in for a generation, FDP can now afford to start buying water companies, secure in the knowledge that once enters any market, he will not be challenged by anyone with equivalent capitalisation. If there even are banks in this scenario. I can't tell, potatoes might be the only currency that matter before long.

After that he buys all the fire trucks, because he alone can afford to fill them with water. Now if anyone has a house fire he turns up with a fire truck and offers to buy their house for a third of its market value. Once the transaction is complete, he lets his private fire department put the flames out.

Also, how exactly does debt and lending work in this thing of yours that isn't a system? I mean there's no bank regulator, no particular currency even, and presumably nothing to stop debtors skipping town other than some sort of revenge if they ever come back? Collateral requirements would need to be enormous. Serious market to be cornered by the unscrupulous there.

you want me to sketch out, in advance, how free people will choose to address debt and lending...in essence, you want me to draw up a system...I won't...a natural rights libertarian minarchy, as long as the three are abided, can tolerate a whole whack of different systems...a community of ancaps will surely handle such things differently than a community of wannabe commies...the real trick is how the ancaps and commies will transact, if they do...hard currency instead of scrip will help in that...folks like myself, avoid banks, preferrin' a hard exchange, upfront, no third party (I'd want gold, not i.o.u.s)

my point: free folks will figure out the details of transaction for themselves

I know what they would do, it is the same thing as happens in failed states and mismanaged economies all the time. They would use some central bank backed currency from abroad. Everyone would. Your economy would do something we refer to as dollarisation. You can't run an economy of any complexity on neolithic barter principles and lumps of metal.

[Belinda]

Why?



the answer is obvious

Because some individuals are always going to be bossier than others. that has always been the case and probably always will be.

you're sayin' if folks weren't bossy there could be a true communism?

I don't know because I can't imagine any group of people , organised or not, where some people are not bossier than others. We just have to be very very careful to allow only bossy people who are also wise to be the rulers.

[Sculptor]

One : we are not actually hardwired to be universally altruistic

Two : communism doesnt work because people like to own stuff as Frank Zappa said

The first applies to true communism and the second applies to economic communism

You all know the difference so I dont need to tell you what it is

We are hardwired to be altruistic.
Amongst many other things.

obey your wirin': gimme your money

I'd rather be fucked with the rough end of a pineapple that help a mean minded little **** like you.

But consider motherhood in mammals. The mother dog gives of her essence to her feed her pups. This is altruism hardwired. Even your Mummy made sacrifices for you, however misguided.

[Sculptor]

I think you have to be a pretty dried up psychopath to miss the fact that all mammals would not exist were it not for the altruistic love of motherhood.
One has to wonder at the degree of psychopathy here on the Forum to have missed that so completely.

[Advocate]

[quote=Sculptor post_id=472774 time=1600792354 user_id=17400]
I think you have to be a pretty dried up psychopath to miss the fact that all mammals would not exist were it not for the altruistic love of motherhood.
One has to wonder at the degree of psychopathy here on the Forum to have missed that so completely.
[/quote]

I think you missed the parts about how having a child is the ultimate nonconsensual act - pure egotism, that existence itself is meaningless, and that life isn't a gift to everyone.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I think you have to be a pretty dried up psychopath to miss the fact that all mammals would not exist were it not for the altruistic love of motherhood.
One has to wonder at the degree of psychopathy here on the Forum to have missed that so completely.

A mother being protective towards her young is hardly the same thing as humans being 'hardwired for altruism'. And humans are probably LESS protective of their young than most other mammals. Just look at all the child abuse. A large chunk of human mothers put their ratbag temporary boyfriends ahead of their own children.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I think you missed the parts about how having a child is the ultimate nonconsensual act - pure egotism, that existence itself is meaningless, and that life isn't a gift to everyone.

Exactly. (But you seriously need to disable that 'BB code' thingy).

[Age]

...I made the right choice to put you aside for a while

But you did NOT put me aside, as you just said that you did actually take a gander at some of what I wrote. Which, by the way, I KNEW 'you' would anyway.

just that one post made me tired

I'm fortifyin' myself with vitamins and collard greens so -- down the road -- I can address your many concerns

gonna be a bit before I'm strong enough to stare into the abyss that is age, though, so: keep them comments, criticisms, and questions comin', and be patient

This is "Henry quirk's" so called "logic"; if we are hardwired to be altruistic, then gimme your money.

Besides the fact that that one individual is NOT Everyone, so giving one's money to "henry quirk" would just NOT make any sense in relation to that, so called, "logic", that one has NOT provided absolutely ANY that proves human beings are NOT altruistic.