RE: Politics, Partisanship, and Propaganda
... politicians lack the knowledge necessary to weigh costs and benefits, and substitute violence for reason.
This is my point - AOC is an outlier! Just give her the time of day, substituting violence for reason is one of her cornerstone values.
Also, I understand the whole Libertarian “taxation is theft/extortion” argument (I’ve been on Steem long enough to have this conversation several times, the Libertarians obviously love it here). It is only true if the taxes don’t serve the people, which they do, but not to the extent that many (including myself) feel is possible. I would say education, libraries, firefighters, public parks, etc. are pretty empowering to the people. The taxpayer money we throw at the war machine however, is excessive. If corporations paid their taxes, and our priorities were realigned somewhat, we would come closer to realizing our societal potential.
Translation:
"It's not theft if it goes to programs that I like."
You can vilify taxes with the word 'theft', or consider them simply part of our 'social contract' in a Social Democracy, but any way you slice it, taxes are ideally how Americans pay in for the greater good of all. Paying taxes is part of being an American, and as such should sustain the livelihood of the people. Maybe that blows, maybe it's theft, but it is just part of our reality. Because this is part of the American condition, we should be able to assure that taxpayer dollars go to the things that cause us to grow and prosper as a people.
There is no social contract.
i like the way you think :)
Of course you do! Welcome to Steem, where the Libertarians run free, without any oppositional discourse!
But, wait... isn't "oppositional discourse" what you were attempting to do?
If so, you'll have to try a little harder.
Why don't you try engaging in discourse, then? Directly address points made.
I left this conversation awhile ago man! I’m not gonna convince you guys that taxes make sense (however, I understand the voluntaryist point of view entirely) or that not every politician is exactly the same, evil enemy of the people. I’ve made my points, been dismissed, you made some points, and I’ve dismissed you. When I see things like
I just know when to stop. I get your stance on these issues, thanks! I have lost my drive here to convince you or @dullhawk of anything. Peace and love though!
Peace and love? Those are incompatible with politics though! :D
I made my assertions and I stated the reasoning behind them. You just made unsupported assertions. Our job isn't to convince one another, but to reason through the issue. If democracy is a peaceful way to organize aspects of society, why can't you make a case for it? I think you know it's just a velvet glove for the iron fist attitude of "submit or die," though, and you don't want to admit that's what lies behind all the pretty political prose from AOC & company. I'm sure you can see it with Trump, but you want to believe that if the Republicans are the bad guys, the Democrats/Progressives are good by default. That's the false dichotomy of political discourse.
Hmm... Okay!
Do you know what a contract is?
If there is a social contract, it is your obligation to make a case for it. The idea was invented by people who couldn't otherwise explain the legitimacy of the government, and it's not a good excuse at all.
So if a mugger gives some of the stolen loot (minus his expenses, of course) to widows and orphans, it's not theft. Because he would be "serving the people".
I LOVE libraries, parks, and education (which is why I despise "public schools"). But there's nothing I want bad enough to rob you at gunpoint to get it. Nothing. If something can't be funded voluntarily it needs to die.
Ok lol! Enjoy life in your commune!
That doesn't make any sense. Advocating liberty is antithetical to advocating communism.
If your public programs and services are worked and funded voluntarily, your society likely functions something like a commune. Living in a commune doesn't have to incorporate full on communism.
Not at all. If services are funded voluntarily, it is a market service. Some might call that capitalism.
Both could be true in different scenarios. Either way, I hope voluntarily funded services become abundant for you someday, and that somehow, you have all that you need.
This isn't something that can go both ways. Either it is true or it is false that politicians represent people. Either it is true or it is false that taxation is extortion. Either it is true or it is false that politicians exercise legitimate authority. If politicians weren't extorting my wealth and driving up the costs of goods and services through economic intervention, I could fund my needs.
I’m sorry m8, but this absolutist position just isn’t true, and we’ll have to agree to disagree. If you’re lumping Bernie Sanders and Mitch McConnell together for example, and telling me they have the same methods and convictions, I have to call bullshit. It takes no effort at all to take this complicated system and simplify it into convinient true/false statements. It’s lazy and inaccurate, not to mention entirely unhelpful to any effort for change.
She isn't different. Her means are identical to those used by Trump. She demands obedience under penalty of theft, kidnapping, or murder.
If her ideas are really good, why can't she find a way to enact them voluntarily? Politics is antithetical to cooperative problem solving.
When government monopolizes a service, it doesn't transform extortion into a blessing. It transforms a necessary service into a bureaucracy.
lolwut? All I said was listen to some of her ideas sometime, which this line shows you clearly have not.
Although our current Congress + presidential cabinet is a shit show, politics is actually meant to be synonymous with cooperative problem solving. This all goes out the window when bipartisanship, civility, and common sense is nowhere to be found. Imposing term limits on members of Congress would be a great start to revitalizing their efficiency in solving some problems.
I have listened to her ideas. I still disagree with her ends and means. That means compliance will be coerced under threat and duress if she gets her way. That isn't cooperation.
There is nothing cooperative about politics. Politics is an artificial zero-sum game. There is no representation. Democracy is a myth. It is no more legitimate than astrology is a science.
Alright man :D
Burden of proof is yours to show that representation is a thing that exists. You can't simply make an assertion and dismiss reasoned dissent.