On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 07:05:33PM -0600, Mirimir wrote: > On 08/28/2016 06:47 PM, juan wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 18:34:58 -0600 > > Mirimir <miri...@riseup.net> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> Maybe high prices are part of it. But someone needs to test stuff. > >> Without required testing, people get poisoned. > > > > LMAO. > > Laugh all you want.
You keep returning to 'external authority' exercising coercive power over 'the poor dum sheeple' in an anarchist forum ... that's worthy of being laughed at :) > But maybe learn some history about food safety. > > I'm not saying that we need "government". But we need some entity that > tests products, "We need an external authority because humans are incapable of building networks of trust, and truly evil doers must be stopped!" > removes harmful ones, and penalizes assholes. Courts, jail, financial compensation are not enough in your world? So we must have some external authority with coercive power to protect sheeple? > Crowd-source it and call it private enforcement, if you like. But you're > a fool if you think that it's not needed. Problems need to be solved. Major problem today though, is that the universal solution to problems is democracy. The problem being, that people -think- that's the universal solution - this is the current Western shared common propaganda, which is largely fully consented to/ believed and mutually deluded within. THAT is the problem. > That's been tried, and it > doesn't fucking work. Not solving a (food etc) problem does not solve that (food etc) problem. It may sound very strange, but I agree with this assertion. > > And without central banks and borders people can't trade. And > > without armies we'd have perpetual war - or peace? Et cetera. > > We're not talking about that shit, bro. Oh yes we are. And, I hear your passion for solving problems - that is a good part of what draws some of us to places like cypherpunks! Your passion for solving problems implies you are with conscience, which if true is also a good thing. Let's encourage these good fundamentals in each other. Can you see anything underlying your conversation so far (like assumptions, externalisation of authority, presumption of sheepleness, etc) that is perhaps unwise for any of us to leave unchallenged, to leave as assumptions? Is it possible you are overly schooled in Western think?
