On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 08:50:49PM -0600, Mirimir wrote: > On 08/28/2016 08:24 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 06:34:58PM -0600, Mirimir wrote: > >> On 08/28/2016 05:52 PM, jim bell wrote: > >>> Heroin is illegal, right? Fentanyl is illegal too, right? See the > >>> pattern?It takes the existence of regulation to allow much of this > >>> problem.Virtually all of the danger of Fentanyl is that people don't > >>> know what quality/concentration is in the sample they just bought > >>> illegally. Make itlegal, and the cost is very low, and quality > >>> could be easily assured. > >> > >> Maybe high prices are part of it. But someone needs to test stuff. > >> Without required testing, people get poisoned. > > > > "required" here implies "government mandated" > > OK, so we do it without government. Maybe prudent businesses only sell > certified stuff, because otherwise people will burn them down, or kill > the owners. But to minimize chaos, you need some organized process, no?
Ah, a good question indeed. No. That's the simple answer. I, Zenaan Harkness from Australia, have ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY no need for externally organised (as in coercion-sanctioned) external authority, to "protect" me in my food purchasing choices. And I want none of that. Because sanctioned coercive power is ALWAYS abused when existing in a "democratic" context. Except that those who give a coercive authority (say by voting to government) have the power to remove that same authority with very low friction and in a very short period of time, that coercive power WILL be abused. Human nature, 1-0-1. > > how about "individuals soon learn about testing, testing becomes > > inexpensive, and "purity" becomes part of trust reputation"? > > That works OK on online marketplaces. But it doesn't work very well in > mass market meatspace. Stuff gets resold too many times. Too many people > get fucked up before anyone's reputation gets damaged. Mirmir, I beg you, please look into the underlying assumptions and Western schooling that pervades such statements as that. It is not good when almost the entirety of the burden of looking into one's assumptions, is placed upon another, be it a Juan or anyone else. For truly constructive and useful dialogue, we must raise our self-critical and introspective conversation. Good luck,
