http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/09/07/a-....

begin

Debating the merits of a particular government policy or proposal with authoritarian-minded political opponents is pointless – if you’re hoping to persuade, at any rate. Far better to ask them a few apparently simple questions – and force them to confront the disquieting answers about the authoritarian nature of the political and social system they support.

For instance, you might ask what their view of slavery is. Is it morally wrong to own another human being? Probably, they will say it is wrong. Now ask: What does it mean to be a slave? Usually, they will tell you it means being the property of another. Now ask the killer follow-up: What does it mean to be the property of another?

Point out that it means having control over another person’s life – control of his actual person, his body. His mind, even.

To be in a position – to be entitled – to use violence to enforce compliance.

A slave is not at liberty to act as he wishes to act. He must do as he is told – and if he does not, he can expect physical punishment and that punishment will not be considered assault. The slave must accept his punishment.

There is no appeal, no recourse. He must bow low and submit – or risk the repercussions, which ultimately include death.

His only hope is escape.

The slave, most obviously, owns nothing – because he controls nothing. He may be allowed to use things. But the owner of these things – himself included – is someone else. Someone else gets to say yes – or no. When – and where. How – and how much. The slave has no real say – in that he is never in a position to say no. Not without consequences raining down upon him.

He merely obeys. Because he must obey.

The fact that his hands may hold the scythe does not mean the scythe is his. The fact that the effort of his body cuts the wheat does not mean the wheat is his. He is permitted to keep a portion. In principle, because in fact, the slave owns nothing that may not be taken away from him. At any time, for any reason. And he is powerless to do anything about it.

The slave’s dwelling, the clothes he wears – even his very body – are subject to arbitrary control against his will by another person or persons. This is the essence of what it means to be a slave.

Be sure your opponent accepts these points – which he must accept, because to not accept them is not unlike refusing to accept that 2 + 2 = four.

Now ask him whether he (or anyone else he knows) is free to determine the course of his own life. Or do others set down terms and conditions which he must obey?

Is he free to do business with whomever he chooses to do business? Or is he told exactly with whom he must do business – and under what conditions?

May he travel freely? Or is he required to travel with permission – and only under certain conditions? Must he carry ownership papers with him wherever he goes? And is it not true that if he is caught without these papers, he is subject to arrest and imprisonment for that reason alone?

Is he free to raise his children as he considers best? To teach them as he sees fit? Or must he teach them things others decree he must teach them?

Is he even free to choose whom to marry? Or must he submit to the authority of others in even this most personal of life’s choices?

Is he free to defend himself when accosted by strangers? Or must he submit to these strangers, if they wear a certain type of outfit? (Did not the overseer also wear a certain type of outfit?)

May he own things?

More precisely, is he permitted other than conditional use of things? For instance, that which he may think of as “his” home. If it is in fact “his,” then surely that means no one else has legal claim to it and cannot take it away from him once he has paid the original seller in full. Ask him about the large payments he must make to others every year, forever, in order to be allowed to remain on “his” property. Remind him that plantation slaves also had homes – in the sense that they were allowed conditional use of dwellings. Dwellings ultimately owned by someone else. The slaves were permitted to use these dwellings so long as their labor provided enough return to the true owners of the dwelling. A slave who refused to work – who declined to make payments in the form of his labor then (and tax payments now) would soon discover who the true owner of “his” dwelling really was.

Just as today.

Ask whether he is compelled to give up whatever portion of the fruits of his labors others decide they are entitled to – and how this differs from the slave in the field being forced to pick cotton for the benefit of others . . . . Ask him what he thinks will happen if he declines to hand over the fruits of his labor… .

Ask whether he is at liberty to do as he wills even with his own poor body. May he freely choose to treat his body’s ailments as he sees fit? Or will he be chained and jailed if he treats himself in other than the “lawful” manner?Ask whether he knows that he may be forcibly taken from his home if he declines to be “treated” in the manner prescribed by others.

Who, then, owns his body? His very person? If I have the power to compel you to do – or not do – then is it not a fact that to some degree at least, I am your owner?And in that case, are you not a slave?

The control need not be vicious or even mean. The owner of a beloved dog is no less the owner of the animal by dint of the fact that he treats it kindly and tends to its needs. The dog is not at liberty to come and go as it pleases. It is allowed to use certain items – an old sofa, for example – and not other things. It does not own anything.

It is owned.

Neither did the plantation slave own anything. And many had benevolent masters – for example, Thomas Jefferson – who tried to treat them with kindness, as they saw it. Who saw themselves as parents of subnormal adult children in need of guidance – and restraint. This benevolent treatment, however, in no way made the slaves other than slaves.

Behind the gentle guiding hand, always the whip.

As it is today – with the exception that today’s slaves are unaware of their condition and imagine themselves to be free. Its subtlety is its genius. Instead of individual plantations, there is one consolidated plantation called “our country.” But we are owned nonetheless.

It is immaterial that we are not normally chained… if the chains may be put on at the first hint of disobedience.

That we are allowed use of more (and nicer) things than the slaves of the past does not in any way change the fact that they are just as owned (because just as controlled) by someone else – and may be taken away at any moment, if the true owners so choose.

Our cotton fields are the cubicles of the modern office; our overseers called by different names. But their job is what it has always been: To make sure we toil, submit and obey. And if we do not… .

Well, we all know the answer to that one.

End

Brilliant!

Very good post. The good questions are hard to spin. I would love to hear Obama or Mitt answer this good question.

Huh? This is basic **** everyone should have thought through around 14 or 15 years old. In fact if you didn't, your homework is to expose yourself to the canon of political philosphy before pretending to have an opinion. This is a critique without letting the advocates of Liberalism make their case, which includes a state. This stuff is so porfoundly anwered that people don' teven feel the need to make the case anymore, which why you don't see it much.

Of course Obama and Mitt could answer this, they went Harvard ****ing Law school. You guys are kidding, right?

Threads like this are great litmus tests!

^ Of whether or not one's been exposed to the last 400 years of thought?

Then enlighten us all knowing Lk,
What would the O's response be?
What would Big M's be?

Hell, what would yours be.

Sure the cultural institution known as the education system would agree with you. Problem is they are wrong on so much. Is it possible YOU have settled it in your own mind? If the reality is that you are in fact nothing but a slave, is it possible you would NOT be able continue on with your comfortable life you have become accustomed to, living as if nothing is wrong around you. Would it not force you to confront the reality that besides what is naturally occurring elements around us the rest of the human experience is simply a series of man made systems we interact with or are forced to live within. Systems that drive what the perception of reality is. In a society, reality is driven by cultural institutions, and the systems they institute. They are not restricted by truth or the rules of math or nature. Case in point would be the US dollar. Backed by nothing but , Full Faith, Fiat, nothingness.

Lk, you are a slave, just as I and everyone else on this board are.

Every time you post Lk it becomes more and more glaringly obvious the level of denial you must project to keep your sanity. Humorous in fact.

Anytime someone tells me that something is settled when we are discussing a "system", created and administrated by a human, so therefore that is NOT naturally occurring and that they do not exclusively control in any sense, makes it quite clear they have made some serious errors in judgment.

I don't think I have time to recapitulate basic Western political philosophy, but if you took basic courses or bought some basic colelge texts and curricula and some of the basic texts mentioned there you'd see the argumetns well laid out.

Hell google Liberalism (the classical kind, not what people say now), I guess, and 'Origins of the state,' and 'legitimacy'

Even if you don't agree with them, they're well fleshed out and non-trivial

LK

And there in lies the crutch, if you believe, I am not much into blind belief or religions. We are not dealing with elements based within a hard science that have known properties and systems or rules that are absolute. Again, you are saying something is settled that Is in no means settled.

Every day new rules and laws are made within our society. To say this issue is settled would be ignoring the ever changing society we live in. At what point do you become a slave and not a citizen LK? Is there ever a point you become a slave?

Is it a personal boundary or are you a slave when the institutions that are enslaving you say you are a slave? And there in lies the crutch Lk? you are pointing to the very institutions who are a part of the series of cultural institutions that are enslaving us and saying,

"but, but, but they say I am not a slave. Its a fact, proven and settled up. If you were more educated and in the know you would be aware of this."

Not a very logical rebuttal or place to be standing at this point in our societies evolution.

Spazznout
Slave number
372-04-8779

eta

Dont flatter yourself big guy, no one is asking you for an education.

The idea that any thoughtful hasn't already fully digested what you
re syaing is silly

Lk

you personally can NOT though, huh.

Guess you are right. I am not a slave. The very institutions that are enslaving me have declared it so. I must be wrong. You are correct LK.

We live in a static world. Governments do not change or fail, currencies are static now and have been so forever. /s


Good god man. Do you have a brain of your own?

Huh? That I disagree with you means I can't digest your TRIVIALLY SIMPLE point?

You really are having a hard time talking to ANYone but a strawman. Downrange should be warning you right now.


The idea that any thoughtful person or collections of persons hasn't already fully digested what you're saying is a silly conceit.

I didn't and certainly wouldn't say there aren't millions of excellent critiques or reviews of any systems(s), (i could make many as well, it's not as if I'm pleased with our government or any of the world's governemnts) just that the idea that aware or educated people don't know this stuff is silly. You're not blowing anyone's mind, LOL. To me this becomes a semantic exercise in 'slave.' Those of us who believe we're not slaves have to acknowledge that there are parallels, and they are uncomfortable and dangerous. The reason for limited government and... Oh god now I'm gonna recapitulate the basics of our political system... We also believe that the existence of the state provides important answers that outweigh the risk or objection, if properly adminisistered (which it isn't).

I'm certainly not standing up for the status quo, just pointing out that there's no "mind-blowing" going on. I never said 'settled' either, just that there lots of answers that are well-known to anyone even passingly familiar with the last 400 years of Western thought.

Strawman, where? You are just making that up.


Your second paragraph concedes my point I was making. Government has a role. Our government has far exceeded that role and the role it was originally intended. Street talk now. Lk, we are slaves bros. No way to cut your way around it. You are making me LOL. I do not think I am some great thinker. Or presenting new Ideas. These are very old ideas in the sociological community. They are the ideas being used to shape society through our cultural institutions, mainly the .gov. They are the ideas enslaving us. What gets to me is your silly refusal to except were we are in society and the position the average citizen plays in it.

Let live in the real world of the now. Not the world of the way it should be or we want it to be. If so you are you are being dishonest with yourself. Which has brought my argument full circle now.

Any time a real question is put to a politician they replay with a long unrelated blather. There is no chance of getting a respectful thoughtful reply.
You are talking about something that doesn't happen in this universe.
If you push it security will throw you out on your butt - if not take you in for a psych evaluation.
Get real.

I said Liberalism explained why goverment can be theoretically legitimate. You're trying to pretend I said I approve of the "real world of the now." I'm objecting to anarchism and the strictest libertarianism, not standing up for what we've got.

My ONLY point is that we are slaves NOW in the current world we all live in. I was never defending nor was the word Anarchy nor Libertarianism in any of my posts. Nor are they listed in the OP. I believe you may have inadvertently drawn the straw man in and it gave the appearance of you defending the status quot by defending that which was not being proposed. The OP asked some good questions that I don't think our leaders would be comfortable answering. I do NOT believe someones world view and understanding is fixed and not going to grow at age 15. lololol. Most don't have a clue at 15 beyond what the .gov ran public education institutions have told them is "real".

So then, do you agree in the current societal structure that the average citizen is a defacto slave?

Cut and dry and to the point. I say yes without a doubt we are slaves to the system in its current form.
What say you Lk?
I can agree to disagree, I am just curios where you stand as you have confused theoretical and reality amongst your posts. I like living in the world of the real. Not what is painted for me.

Lk,

another question, do you pay taxes, fees, and abide by all laws as required by the current governmental system to which you have said you disagree with?

Why?

What are the repercussions?

Yes this is basic, but can you answer the questions. I do not think you can without challenging your own comfortable world view.

The OP is a self-described Libertarian politics site.

I said before and say there are parallels to salvery. Actually calling it salvery, full-stop is overplaying one's hand. Pushing a good point to where it's a bad point is a mistake.

I'd describe the real world as the real world: A regulated state with diminishing freedom, after impresssive progress increasing freedom. We still retain some important freedoms slaves never know and incompatible with the word slavery.

I understand he is a self described Libertarian. However it does not invalidate the questions and points he makes which I believe are the very discussions our forefathers were having when drawing up our constitution, and very important that people are self aware of the answers. I believe most in our society are NOT and have not even considered 10% of the questions posed.

I disagree that it is a mistake in that you must first acknowledge and accept the problem and the environment in which any problem exists before you can even begin to draw up solutions. This is why we continue to see the creep towards slavery faster and faster every day now in my opinion. The manipulations have been hidden in complexity and divided amongst institutions diluting there in your face effect. Sometimes coming out and admitting a problem full on with no sugar coating is just what the Dr.ordered. As long as we continue to tell ourselves as a society that we are number 1, we are Free, and that voting in a bankrupt system makes a difference, we will continue to march towards absolute slavery, as we will have missed the forest for the trees as we were lost in a world where we were manipulated rather than being of freewill

^ So you're saying that the state is conceptually or theoretically legitmate, just that the current balance and trend is wrong? Fine, we agree there. If you want to knock some sense into people with rhetorical flourish be my guest. I don't think it'll work, because it overplays the hand.

Definitely we are in agreement there. I am no Anarchist. I am a realist. I understand that for a society to maximize their success and productivity some form of organization or governance is needed. The power of governance must be in the hands of the people though. I just believe we have gone way past that point in nearly every aspect of our current governmental structure. I cannot honestly say that we govern ourselves anymore in this country. Sure the rules say it is and we practice the tradition of voting. But in real world practice those rules and traditions have no bearing on the reality of whom is governing the country any longer. This is another reason I declare myself a slave. A slave to a system. Unfortunately it is a system we all legitimize every day by spending money, following the laws, paying our taxes. We are stuck as without taking part in those activities you die or are incarcerated away from society. So yeah, I feel like we are slaves.

Like I said, a great litmus test...

It's not necessary to argue or say anything, people automatically self-define.

Really fun to watch.

Yup, I peed on my Anarchist test strip and it came up negative

But your statist sympathies bubble up frequently...

I think even if you got a liberal minded statist to agree that we are slaves to the system they would be ok with it. They gladly trade liberty for freedom from responsibility.