You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Ethics of the Great Steemit Experiment
Always up for furthering the discussion! I'm not sure how, pragmatically, you enforce the organization's will then. The topic of whether or not this government does actually function is the people's interests is a separate one. A hypothetical government that does behave in the population's best interest still needs a method to have individuals act towards the group's interest.
If it is based on voluntary association with mutually beneficial goals, why would it need enforcement? Here are the group's goals. You're free to join or leave as you see fit. Imagine if membership in the United States was voluntary for each state - what that would do to the abuse of federal power. If I was President (which I can never be) a Constitutional Amendment to that effect would be my top priority, followed by bringing the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad case back before the Supreme Court and filing suit against the Congress and Federal Reserve for violation of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 of the US Constitution ... but I digress.
Such a government is hypothetical because it has never existed. Every political structure is perfect, on paper, but people in the real world aren't angels. As a pragmatist, I can get behind a need for some structure, because of that reality. If, for example, markets were completely unregulated, there would be markets for nuclear weapons and seven-year-old slave girls, and somebody has to be able to tell them, "No." But even that may be a slippery slope toward tyranny.
I also would object to anyone other than me deciding what is or isn't in my best interest.
A more in depth response than I expected, thank you!
I'm in agreement with you for the most part, lots of government systems are wonderful on paper and terrible in practice. I'm not advocating communist style work placement or anything like that. I think a government's three main roles are to ensure people behave fairly and equitably towards each other, to collect taxes in service of the common good of the nation, and to leave you the fuck alone otherwise. I think people that like to claim taxation is theft are generally extremely naive. Most people who find some measure of success are able to do so only because of the infrastructure and support the public provides.
Towards your question of voluntary or not, it's the same question of why should I pay union dues even if I don't want to be in the union? It feels like a measure of control placed upon you, however whether you want to participate or not you benefit from the actions of the union. We are supposed to exclude people from public roads if they don't want to pay taxes? What about from schools or fire department coverage? How would that even work? Even if you owned a helicopter to bypass all of that, more than likely your work depends on the public infrastructure to function.
To that end I support a more free and open immigration policy between developed nations. Really the only way to make this voluntary is to have the option to move to a different country and more aligns to your philosophy. I would love to move to Germany if it was feasible, however I highly doubt both my fiance and I would qualify to immigrate there based on their requirements.
I've been meaning to type a reply to this but it's hard to convey tone in writing without it appearing ... obnoxious. That and I'm swamped (on my "day off") with the phishing scam and hopefully averting a flag war, or at least preparing to win one.
I would really like to discuss this though, because as far as I'm concerned it's the conversation everyone should be having at their dinner tables. Hopefully I'll have time to formulate it, or we can pick another venue like Discord or something.
I agree, I think we might actually get things done in this country if we could sit down and have a conversation and get some understanding of how government should work for us. Any time you want to discuss you can always find me on discord!