1819

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Unlike 1819, the politicians aren't ruining the free market as the unions control them in the background. It's a recipe for disaster, as we've seen. There's no free-market to what has happened to GM this past year. Too much artificial interference from those unions.


Yeah, if those evil unions hadn't won us 40 hour work weeks, two-day weekends, pensions, and the basic right not to have your family starve to death as a result of one being injured on the job, we could all have the privileges of eating lard sandwiches containing rat and human remains...
 
Originally Posted By: TooManyWheels
Well, we didn't have a clue about your anarchic puritanism, but now we will make a note of it and use a more descriptive world for chaos and non-democratic authoritarianism.


"Non-democratic authoritarianism" is *perfect*; too bad it's such a burden to type.
crazy2.gif


I also fail to understand "anarchic puritanism", in that I am not sure whether that was a respectful nod or a pejorative.

Originally Posted By: TooManyWheels
However, it appears that supporters of the pure anarchy you describe are also without a clue, in their own idealistic way.


I really, really hope I don't single handedly get this thread locked, but I'll just clarify one more thing before I head back to the Computers section: Anarchy does NOT mean an absence of government; it means an absence of RULERS. In an anarchic society, government and councils would be directly elected (and most likely *qualified and experienced* in the area being governed - Go figure!) and directly and immediately recallable by the electorate in the case of misappropriation or impropriety. Direct democracy prohibiting coercive authority, and ensuring that society is shaped and guided according to the wishes *of* the society.

The only real *ideal* behind it, then, is that there are no rulers. How any given society would govern itself would be entirely up to the people in the society.

Sorry for the blatantly political hijacking of the thread!
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: TooManyWheels
which turns into an anarchic society which is inhospitable to civilized life or business.


OH, COME ON.

You don't have a flippin' CLUE what anarchy is, do you? Lemme guess: It's horned, fanged insaniacs throwing bombs at babies and laying in carnal congress with goat-devils?

Sorry, fellas, it's just that people talk about individual responsibility and natural balance in a market, not knowing that that *is* the very definition of anarchy: a total absence of coercive authority. Free will. Libertariansm. Personal accountability. Common sense. Direct democracy. Self governance.

*Most of you here have very, very, very strong Libertarian/ Anarchic leanings!!!*

I honestly hope I don't get this thread locked due my defense of the "A" word; but it just burns my butt when people misuse the word, which is kinda insulting to some good people. Use "chaotic" instead, please.


There is no "free market." It's a corporatist illusion, just like (property) libertarianism is largely propagated by anti-New Deal extremists and "think tanks" extensively underwritten by corporations (much like our Congress) and their never ceasing propagandist manipulations coupled with their partially successful attempts to get middle class and working people to largely vote against their own interests...

The robber baron markets that spawned massive wealth polarization and monopolies and oligarchies were hardly ever considered "free". It came at a huge price, and nearly resulted in communist/fascist insurrection at the beginning of the Great Depression, prior to the New Deal (which was largely a political pacification program as much an economic one)...

The article is a Utopian fantasy fondly constructing a revisionist history that never actually existed...
 
Last edited:
My question is why don't we just take our country back.

Start little by little, I'm trying my darnedest to help, but folks just can't grasp the idea of it.

I'm still accepting liberty dollars in exchange of goods and services.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
...Anarchy does NOT mean an absence of government; it means an absence of RULERS. In an anarchic society, government and councils would be directly elected (and most likely *qualified and experienced* in the area being governed - Go figure!) and directly and immediately recallable by the electorate in the case of misappropriation or impropriety....


mad-max.jpg
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Unlike 1819, the politicians aren't ruining the free market as the unions control them in the background. It's a recipe for disaster, as we've seen. There's no free-market to what has happened to GM this past year. Too much artificial interference from those unions.


Yeah, if those evil unions hadn't won us 40 hour work weeks, two-day weekends, pensions, and the basic right not to have your family starve to death as a result of one being injured on the job, we could all have the privileges of eating lard sandwiches containing rat and human remains...


I worked next to the stockyards in Chicago, EVERY time I drove by I though of "The Jungle" and how fortunate we are to have unions that made labor more 'normal'.

However, the pendulum of the unions has swung too far in the wrong direction. These unions demand more & more, only sucking the employer DRY.

Nowhere is this more evident than with the auto workers unions.

Now we ALL pay because of it. Is THIS how the union leaders back in the early 20th wanted this to shake out?
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Unlike 1819, the politicians aren't ruining the free market as the unions control them in the background. It's a recipe for disaster, as we've seen. There's no free-market to what has happened to GM this past year. Too much artificial interference from those unions.


Yeah, if those evil unions hadn't won us 40 hour work weeks, two-day weekends, pensions, and the basic right not to have your family starve to death as a result of one being injured on the job, we could all have the privileges of eating lard sandwiches containing rat and human remains...


Unions, in my opinion, at least, were Western industrialized society's greatest leap forward during the first few periods of the industrial revolution. Absolutely, their establishment raised the standard of living for working people immeasurably and mitigated against terrible, terrible exploitations of workers by terribly, terribly unscrupulous arses.

Today, however, their image in the eyes of the general populace has suffered. When I worked at a unionized casino here in Windsor for some years, I was very, very frustrated at both the effectiveness (read: lack thereof) and the practices of the union. There were examples of employees caught stealing red-handed, fired, then forcibly re-hired or given extravagant severance because the union "fought" for the worker. The union was also utterly powerless against management in most day-to-day affairs that I was aware of, so they basically created an adversarial workplace without providing much in the way of tangible security or benefits, save for the odd $0.50/ hour wage hike over x# of years.

I think we all owe the early organizers, who braved threats, coercion and violence to fight for humane and decent treatment a debt of gratitude. They did so without the help of (in fact, largely in spite of the efforts of) the government, which would have inevitably buggered everything up.

Having said that, I value as much as anything a society that encourages innovation and creative entrepreneurship; and I believe a society is best served when people are free to pursue their self-interests. I agree that modern unions may be a working impediment to that spirit today.
 
Quote:
It came at a huge price, and nearly resulted in communist/fascist insurrection at the beginning of the Great Depression

Got a link?
 
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Unlike 1819, the politicians aren't ruining the free market as the unions control them in the background. It's a recipe for disaster, as we've seen. There's no free-market to what has happened to GM this past year. Too much artificial interference from those unions.


Yeah, if those evil unions hadn't won us 40 hour work weeks, two-day weekends, pensions, and the basic right not to have your family starve to death as a result of one being injured on the job, we could all have the privileges of eating lard sandwiches containing rat and human remains...


I worked next to the stockyards in Chicago, EVERY time I drove by I though of "The Jungle" and how fortunate we are to have unions that made labor more 'normal'.

However, the pendulum of the unions has swung too far in the wrong direction. These unions demand more & more, only sucking the employer DRY.

Nowhere is this more evident than with the auto workers unions.

Now we ALL pay because of it. Is THIS how the union leaders back in the early 20th wanted this to shake out?


Many, but not all, of the generalist arguments people make against unions are exaggerations and misnomers. The average union autoworker actually makes little more an hour than the nonunion, foreign sourced companies located mostly in the South. Yes, the jobs' bank was silly, and is now gone. The legacy costs are horrific, and have to be dealt with. But the average worker in the typical union will never see these types of benefits for better or worse...

And we can talk all day about how companies such as Wal-Mart and ToysRUs have been accused to abusing workers rights and frustrating any sort of the ability of their workers to unionize. Not long ago, both were accused of forcing hourly workers to punch-out after 40-hours and then continue to work so they didn't have to pay overtime in some states.

Um, "shakedown?" It was the arrogant guys at GM that negotiated those contracts, because they believed that they never would have any more than two other US companies to face and that they would have similar UAW contracts...

You know, those lovable GM exec's that stifled innovation, made lousy cars that fell apart or knowingly designed ones that killed their occupants in fiery deaths, and used the "free market" to destroy any truly innovative competitors like Tucker and his "Torpedo."

Yeah, it's all the unions fault that Toyota and Honda came in and actually built small cars whose engines didn't crack open after 30,000 miles...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
...Anarchy does NOT mean an absence of government; it means an absence of RULERS. In an anarchic society, government and councils would be directly elected (and most likely *qualified and experienced* in the area being governed - Go figure!) and directly and immediately recallable by the electorate in the case of misappropriation or impropriety....


mad-max.jpg



Is this supposed to be a photo illustrating what an anarchist looks like?! This person is obviously *just a Raiders fan*.
LOL.gif


Ironically, I'll bet most Raiders fans would like to immediately recall Al Davis these days.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
...Anarchy does NOT mean an absence of government; it means an absence of RULERS. In an anarchic society, government and councils would be directly elected (and most likely *qualified and experienced* in the area being governed - Go figure!) and directly and immediately recallable by the electorate in the case of misappropriation or impropriety....


mad-max.jpg



Is this supposed to be a photo illustrating what an anarchist looks like?! This person is obviously *just a Raiders fan*.
LOL.gif


Ironically, I'll bet most Raiders fans would like to immediately recall Al Davis these days.


You've never seen Mad Max?
wink.gif


The American libertarian dream of no gov't is nothing more than a move towards an oligopoly, and would result in corporate fascism - which in itself is a merger of corporations and the state. Without gov't, there is a power vacuum, and the absence of gov't does not make it disappear...

It's just a pipe dream on par with Marx's silly notions...
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
You've never seen Mad Max?
wink.gif



I sure did. I think I was 10. Scared the bujeepers outta me, unlike The Raiders (says the Lions fan!
blush.gif
)

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
The American libertarian dream of no gov't is nothing more than a move towards an oligopoly, and would result in corporate fascism - which in itself is a merger of corporations and the state. Without gov't, there is a power vacuum, and the absence of gov't does not make it disappear...

It's just a pipe dream on par with Marx's silly notions...


Agreed! The case could be made that we're pretty darn close to corporate fascism here and now. Stripping the government of its power and choosing to have structures of governance directly accountable to the electorate is the dream of the pure Libertarian.
 
Quote:
The American libertarian dream of no gov't

Libertarian does not mean no government. The Founders tried a loose government at first (the Articles of Confederation) and it didn't work so they wrote and ratified the Constitution, which gave very limited power to the government.

You'll never find a group more libertarian than the Founders of this country.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
I think we all owe the early organizers, who braved threats, coercion and violence to fight for humane and decent treatment a debt of gratitude. They did so without the help of (in fact, largely in spite of the efforts of) the government, which would have inevitably buggered everything up.

Having said that, I value as much as anything a society that encourages innovation and creative entrepreneurship; and I believe a society is best served when people are free to pursue their self-interests. I agree that modern unions may be a working impediment to that spirit today.
That, I'm glad you said. There is a huge difference between a society with a Lewis and Clark style orientation and groups centered more on suppression or avoidance. A Lois and Clark is probably the exception.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
It came at a huge price, and nearly resulted in communist/fascist insurrection at the beginning of the Great Depression

Got a link?


crackmeup2.gif
Aren't you capable of offering an opposing point of view without a text template to feed into the Anarchists version of some jive/ebon converter?
crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
The American libertarian dream of no gov't

Libertarian does not mean no government. The Founders tried a loose government at first (the Articles of Confederation) and it didn't work so they wrote and ratified the Constitution, which gave very limited power to the government.

You'll never find a group more libertarian than the Founders of this country.


I think Thomas Jefferson might be rolling in his grave on that one, and trying to argue what they would believe in today's day and age is pretty dubious at best....
beer3.gif


Incidentally, I repeatedly show up as "progressive libertarian" on those political survey/quiz/tests or whatever...
 
Last edited:
"trying to argue what they would believe in today's day and age is pretty dubious at best....'

Not dubious at all, but the point of debate. The founders put together the longest lasting government doctrine in the history of mankind that has and is gradually being eroded by those that "know" better. Arguing what they would believe in this day and age may be very essence of what our future will be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GON
21 worst metros for homeownership
Replies
10
Views
684
bbhero
A
  • Locked
Israel at War - major intelligence failure
Replies
18
Views
878
Astro14
J
Looking for the plastic paper material name that you can print on
Replies
7
Views
467
tcp71
GON
Very special audio going into the fourth of July
Replies
0
Views
225
GON
GON
NFL 's biggest name that is drawing ratings- Taylor Swift
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
2K
Yah-Tah-Hey
Back
Top