Actually I'm not sure. I know I come off as being all conspiracy and OMG they're coming for us, but it's intended as satire and just plain venting. I don't feel a need for body armor, and as a rule I don't click on ads.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Jeff Nyman <[email protected]>wrote: > So, how much was the armor? > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:47 PM, S. Dale Morrey <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > LOL the ads in my gmail are getting more and more frightening. > > One recent ad was for Browning rifles. > > The ad attached to this email is for AR500 Body Armor, evidently the most > > affordable level 3 body armor on the planet and also made right here in > the > > USA! > > > > Ok yeah I really need to get off gmail, the topic relevance of ads is > > getting moving from humorous to creepy. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Daniel C. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Russel Caldwell <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > What makes government force so legitimate? > > > > > > Did you realize, when you asked this, that you were opening a > > > philosophical can of worms that has been addressed / tackled from > > > various perspectives over at least the past two centuries? I guess > > > that sounds kind of accusatory, and that's not my intention. It's > > > just such a perfectly phrased question, in a subject area that is > > > pretty commonly addressed in civics classes (or in my case, writing > > > classes where your professor happens to be a civics nut,) that it rang > > > my "college professor is opening a discussion" bell. > > > > > > Some broad strokes on the issue: > > > > > > - Governments are (at least ostensibly) accountable. This is part of > > > why agents of the government who are authorized to use force (e.g. > > > police officers and soldiers) wear uniforms with identification on > > > them. The uniforms identify the person wearing it as someone who is > > > acting on behalf of the government. It establishes accountability for > > > the actions of the person wearing the uniform. If you don't like what > > > someone in uniform does, you can go to the person that he or she is > > > accountable to and complain. Ultimately, in the United States, the > > > government is accountable to the citizens. (In practice we know that > > > this is not 100% true, but it is what we strive for.) This has all > > > kinds of ramifications when it comes to wars, the ability of police to > > > make arrests (an arrest being a use of force,) etc. > > > > > > - Governments are (again, ostensibly) an extension of a social > > > contract. (See Hobbes's Leviathan.) If I'm remembering my readings > > > correctly, Hobbes posits that humans enter into a society and grant > > > our governments the sole authority for force in exchange for the > > > increased freedoms and protection that joining the society give us. > > > The alternative, he claims, is for us to live in a state of nature, of > > > a constant and continual war of all against all. Obviously this is > > > more of a philosophical enterprise than a statement of historical > > > fact, but it does make for a good thought experiment. So, to bring it > > > back to the question of what makes government force legitimate: it's > > > legitimate because everyone who participates in a society implicitly > > > (or explicitly, in some cases) cedes the right to use force to their > > > government. > > > > > > > As was pointed out earlier most > > > > people are disillusioned with the system to the point that there are > > more > > > > and more of us that see no point in participating in the political > > > process. > > > > > > This does bring into question the legitimacy of our current > > > government, but that doesn't necessarily intersect with the question > > > of whether governments are the sole legitimate wielders of force in a > > > society. > > > > > > > In a free market every transaction is freely entered into by both > > > parties. > > > > > > This is probably a good time to mention the tyranny of violence. It > > > is often proposed that we should all "just get along" or that humans > > > should work toward an end of violence. These ideas are fantastic in > > > both meanings of the word. They are fantastic ideas that I agree with > > > and which I hope we can bring to fruition, but they are also fantastic > > > in that they pretty much come from the realm of fantasy. This isn't a > > > statement about the fallen nature of man or anything. (I personally > > > think that the human future is bright and that we can overcome our > > > darker nature, but that's a separate topic.) It's just the nature of > > > violence: there is no room for consent when violence gets involved. > > > > > > In this fantasy world where we all live without violence, all it takes > > > is for one person to decide that they're going to be violent and > > > suddenly everyone else loses their agency. The choice to live in > > > peace no longer exists: you can either be violently subjugated, or you > > > can try to stop the violence... which ironically requires being > > > violent in return. And of course you didn't choose violence - > > > somebody else did, and when they chose it your ability to live in > > > peace disappeared. > > > > > > Without a government (which is the sole authorized proprietor of > > > violence) in place, a free market is only free so long as everyone > > > plays nice. Alternatively you could create a free market in which > > > mercenary protection is available to those who can afford it, but you > > > probably didn't even finish reading that statement before you realized > > > how wrong that situation would go. > > > > > > > When the government does something most of us have no idea what > > > transpired, > > > > and we cannot possibly know. There is not enough time in the day to > > keep > > > > track of what these jokers are doing. Just look at the Obamacare > mess. > > > How > > > > many, even in congress, really know what is in that bill, much less > > what > > > > the consequences will be. > > > > > > Our current American government, yes, absolutely. It's a damn mess. > > > But that doesn't mean that all governments everywhere must be a damn > > > mess. > > > > > > >In my mind, destructive monopoly power is derived from the government. > > > > > > A government (which, as defined in this email, is the sole arbiter of > > > force / violence) can certainly create monopolies. But free > > > capitalism, with no government, will also result in monopolies. As is > > > typical, the truth and the best option both lie somewhere between the > > > extremes. > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > /* > > > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > > > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > > > Don't fear the penguin. > > > */ > > > > > > > /* > > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > > Don't fear the penguin. > > */ > > > > > > -- > *Jeff Nyman* > *IT Coordinator* > American Leadership Academy > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ > /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
