What five changes to the government would you make?

[Cisairse]

Ever heard of the phrase "monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force?" If you have a defense force that actively defends with force against other (offensive) forces, you're a state.

That's not a monopoly, mate. If I sell burgers, that doesn't mean I have a monopoly on burger selling...

No, but if you sell burgers, it does make you a burger seller, and not a non-burger-seller-who-just-happens-to-sell-burgers.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Ah yes, the mythical world where the entire world rebels against their governments because... reasons.

You realize all that's doing is inviting the inevitable rise of violent, tyrannical gangs that use terrorism to keep people in line yes? Or do you really believe just handing everybody a gun will keep that from happening?

That boogey man scenario is what we have now.
There's a reason the police are called blue Isis.
That's what you're defending.

The police? You mean the ones that stop people from murdering, robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing...?

[Kaltovar]

You don't need a state or government to have an effective defensive force.

First of all, how are you going to build fighter aircraft? It costs upwards of 100 Million dollars for a modern one and years of development by thousands of people, and by the time one is completed it's already on it's way to being obsolete. You LITERALLY CAN NOT defend territory without an airforce if your enemy is willing to just drone strike you. Terrorists in Afghanistan do not hold permanent territory for this exact reason.

What prevents this defense force from declaring itself a Military Junta?

How are you going to build and pay for tanks, or at the very least anti-tank guided missiles? Even if the enemy doesn't want to carpet bomb you, they will send tanks. A single ATGM costs thousands of dollars just to buy, let alone design and manufacture, and I doubt people are going to sell them to an anarchist country. Even if they will, how are you going to pay for enough of them to put up a real resistance? What kind of organization is going to do that? I am literally truly curious.

Er, I'm one who normally argues that there's dramatically less racism than there used to be and people are often being dramatic (this as a mixed race person) ... But to argue that there's NO MORE RACISM strikes me as absurd. Especially since a big part of what has made things so much better is institutional protections like laws that say "Closing polling places in minority communities is very illegal".

I can't believe this is an actual court ruling that's still in effect. Of course it should be overturned.

Believe it.

In defending the coverage formula, the Government, the intervenors, and the dissent also rely heavily on data from the record that they claim justify disparate coverage. Congress compiled thousands of pages of evidence before reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act. The court below and the parties have debated what that record shows—they have gone back and forth about whether to compare covered to noncovered jurisdictions as blocks, how to disaggregate the data State by State, how to weigh §2 cases as evidence of ongoing discrimination, and whether to consider evidence not before Congress, among other issues...Regardless of how to look at the record, however, no one can fairly say that it shows anything approaching the “pervasive,” “flagrant,” “widespread,” and “rampant” discrimination that faced Congress in 1965, and that clearly distinguished the covered jurisdictions from the rest of the Nation at that time.

I do believe it! Figure of speech.

[Antityranicals]

That's not a monopoly, mate. If I sell burgers, that doesn't mean I have a monopoly on burger selling...

No, but if you sell burgers, it does make you a burger seller, and not a non-burger-seller-who-just-happens-to-sell-burgers.

But, just as you defined it, a state is not just a user of force. It is a "monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force." If a state was just a user of force, criminals would be tens of thousands of little states each declaring war on other states. But they're not.

[Samadhi]

That boogey man scenario is what we have now.
There's a reason the police are called blue Isis.
That's what you're defending.

The police? You mean the ones that stop people from murdering, robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing...?

Yes, the police, the ones constantly robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing and all types of criminal activity.

[Samadhi]

You don't need a state or government to have an effective defensive force.

First of all, how are you going to build fighter aircraft? It costs upwards of 100 Million dollars for a modern one and years of development by thousands of people, and by the time one is completed it's already on it's way to being obsolete. You LITERALLY CAN NOT defend territory without an airforce if your enemy is willing to just drone strike you. Terrorists in Afghanistan do not hold permanent territory for this exact reason.

What prevents this defense force from declaring itself a Military Junta?

How are you going to build and pay for tanks, or at the very least anti-tank guided missiles? Even if the enemy doesn't want to carpet bomb you, they will send tanks. A single ATGM costs thousands of dollars just to buy, let alone design and manufacture, and I doubt people are going to sell them to an anarchist country. Even if they will, how are you going to pay for enough of them to put up a real resistance? What kind of organization is going to do that? I am literally truly curious.

Believe it.

I do believe it! Figure of speech.

Do you know how cheap and easy suicide drones are to make.

There's nothing exceptional about the organisation of building fight planes.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

The police? You mean the ones that stop people from murdering, robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing...?

Yes, the police, the ones constantly robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing and all types of criminal activity.

You realize most police officers *don't* do that stuff, right?

Maybe you should consume less sensationalist media.

[Antityranicals]

The police? You mean the ones that stop people from murdering, robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing...?

Yes, the police, the ones constantly robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing and all types of criminal activity.

Eh, maybe not raping usually, but the rest, yeah. Except the robbing is called criminal forfeiture, the slaving/kidnapping is called wrongful arrest, and the vandalizing is called collateral damage.

[Samadhi]

Yes, the police, the ones constantly robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing and all types of criminal activity.

You realize most police officers *don't* do that stuff, right?

Maybe you should consume less sensationalist media.

You understand the reported rate for domestic violence from police officers is 40% right. And it's not hard to imagine an unreported rate 25% higher. That's half the police there.

[Kaltovar]

First of all, how are you going to build fighter aircraft? It costs upwards of 100 Million dollars for a modern one and years of development by thousands of people, and by the time one is completed it's already on it's way to being obsolete. You LITERALLY CAN NOT defend territory without an airforce if your enemy is willing to just drone strike you. Terrorists in Afghanistan do not hold permanent territory for this exact reason.

What prevents this defense force from declaring itself a Military Junta?

How are you going to build and pay for tanks, or at the very least anti-tank guided missiles? Even if the enemy doesn't want to carpet bomb you, they will send tanks. A single ATGM costs thousands of dollars just to buy, let alone design and manufacture, and I doubt people are going to sell them to an anarchist country. Even if they will, how are you going to pay for enough of them to put up a real resistance? What kind of organization is going to do that? I am literally truly curious.



I do believe it! Figure of speech.

Do you know how cheap and easy suicide drones are to make.

There's nothing exceptional about the organisation of building fight planes.

A suicide drone can not protect you from having missiles shot at you.

Where are you going to build the drones? They will just destroy the factory.

Who is going to build the drones, and with what money? What industry is going to make the explosives? Those are a controlled substance internationally and require heavy duty chemical plants that are guess what VERY EASY TO BOMB AND SUPER FLAMMABLE.

Why are you responding to just a single one of my criticisms and ignoring all of the other ones that make you squirm?

[Samadhi]

Yes, the police, the ones constantly robbing, raping, slaving, kidnapping, vandalizing and all types of criminal activity.

Eh, maybe not raping usually, but the rest, yeah. Except the robbing is called criminal forfeiture, the slaving/kidnapping is called wrongful arrest, and the vandalizing is called collateral damage.

Yeah, most sex workers I know have been raped by police at one stage or another.

[Kaltovar]

You realize most police officers *don't* do that stuff, right?

Maybe you should consume less sensationalist media.

You understand the reported rate for domestic violence from police officers is 40% right. And it's not hard to imagine an unreported rate 25% higher. That's half the police there.

That study is laughable and has a sample size of under 10,000 (To be more precise, under 500)

Recent studies have pegged it at being around 16% That is SIXTEEN PERCENT OF CRIMES COMMITTED BY OFFICERS, not 16% of officers committing that crime.

https://kutv.com/news/local/40-of-polic ... study-says

[Samadhi]

Do you know how cheap and easy suicide drones are to make.

There's nothing exceptional about the organisation of building fight planes.

A suicide drone can not protect you from having missiles shot at you.

Where are you going to build the drones? They will just destroy the factory.

Who is going to build the drones, and with what money? What industry is going to make the explosives? Those are a controlled substance internationally and require heavy duty chemical plants that are guess what VERY EASY TO BOMB AND SUPER FLAMMABLE.

Why are you responding to just a single one of my criticisms and ignoring all of the other ones that make you squirm?

You're going to have to actually make coherent individual points if you want me to specifically answer them.

They need to know you're there and a threat to fire a drone at you.

You mean the drones that can be 3d printed and equipped with effective explosives made from household chemicals?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Having an effective defensive force pretty much makes you a state.

That's going to be fun for you to prove.

Makno is the easiest example. Everyone was big on all the anarchy stuff but it had to become a de facto military dictatorship to survive for even a little bit, and it still got crushed eventually.

[Neutraligon]

A suicide drone can not protect you from having missiles shot at you.

Where are you going to build the drones? They will just destroy the factory.

Who is going to build the drones, and with what money? What industry is going to make the explosives? Those are a controlled substance internationally and require heavy duty chemical plants that are guess what VERY EASY TO BOMB AND SUPER FLAMMABLE.

Why are you responding to just a single one of my criticisms and ignoring all of the other ones that make you squirm?

You're going to have to actually make coherent individual points if you want me to specifically answer them.

They need to know you're there and a threat to fire a drone at you.

You mean the drones that can be 3d printed and equipped with effective explosives made from household chemicals?

who is going to pay for that?

[Antityranicals]

Anyway, to answer the question of the OP...

1. Ban abortion. It's murder, folks... It's time we move morally beyond the stone age, and actually ban murder.
2. Decriminalize tax evasion. Maybe if the government's budget is limited to what the people are willing to voluntarily give, it will be more sensible.
3. Ban deficits. If the government can't afford it, it shouldn't get funded.
4. Eliminate all regulations. If somebody is harmed by the behavior of a company or individual, that's what civil courts are for.
5. Decriminalize victimless crimes. If nobody's harmed, there's no reason to prosecute.

[Kaltovar]

A suicide drone can not protect you from having missiles shot at you.

Where are you going to build the drones? They will just destroy the factory.

Who is going to build the drones, and with what money? What industry is going to make the explosives? Those are a controlled substance internationally and require heavy duty chemical plants that are guess what VERY EASY TO BOMB AND SUPER FLAMMABLE.

Why are you responding to just a single one of my criticisms and ignoring all of the other ones that make you squirm?

You're going to have to actually make coherent individual points if you want me to specifically answer them.

They need to know you're there and a threat to fire a drone at you.

You mean the drones that can be 3d printed and equipped with effective explosives made from household chemicals?

I'm making lots of coherent individual points. You are so profoundly ridiculous that I'm going to go take drugs right this moment to relieve the physical and emotional pain your words have caused me.

I sincerely hope you do not change. You are magical.

[Antityranicals]

You're going to have to actually make coherent individual points if you want me to specifically answer them.

They need to know you're there and a threat to fire a drone at you.

You mean the drones that can be 3d printed and equipped with effective explosives made from household chemicals?

who is going to pay for that?

Anyone. With price-tags that cheap, worrying about that getting funded is like worrying about a girl scout camping trip getting funded, and those do all the time, despite being far less important.

[Neutraligon]

Anyway, to answer the question of the OP...

1. Ban abortion. It's murder, folks... It's time we move morally beyond the stone age, and actually ban murder.
2. Decriminalize tax evasion. Maybe if the government's budget is limited to what the people are willing to voluntarily give, it will be more sensible.
3. Ban deficits. If the government can't afford it, it shouldn't get funded.
4. Eliminate all regulations. If somebody is harmed by the behavior of a company or individual, that's what civil courts are for.
5. Decriminalize victimless crimes. If nobody's harmed, there's no reason to prosecute.

1. No it is not. It is time we move morally beyond that let us control other people's bodies. Also this conflicts with 4
2. Unlikely, instead it simply means your government will no longer work at all
3. This assures the government will no longer work given that government does not work like households
4. So what are people who cannot afford a lawyer supposed to do? also, what are you going to do about the unequal access to information

[Neutraligon]

who is going to pay for that?

Anyone. With price-tags that cheap, worrying about that getting funded is like worrying about a girl scout camping trip getting funded, and those do all the time, despite being far less important.

So..no one.

[Kaltovar]

Anyway, to answer the question of the OP...

1. Ban abortion. It's murder, folks... It's time we move morally beyond the stone age, and actually ban murder.
2. Decriminalize tax evasion. Maybe if the government's budget is limited to what the people are willing to voluntarily give, it will be more sensible.
3. Ban deficits. If the government can't afford it, it shouldn't get funded.
4. Eliminate all regulations. If somebody is harmed by the behavior of a company or individual, that's what civil courts are for.
5. Decriminalize victimless crimes. If nobody's harmed, there's no reason to prosecute.

I disagree with all of these, but at least I can understand where you're coming from and appreciate the sentiments involved.

I sympathize with 3 ... I think it's something to strive toward, but I don't think immediately doing it would be practical. I'm sure you disagree and feel that society would operate fine without most of what we're spending money on, but I'm not of that opinion myself.

[Farnhamia]

Do you have any actual criticisms to offer or are you just going to insult me?

Gun control is shit and ineffective.
Voting is shit and tyranny. There's no way to fix this.
There's heaps of great uses for coal besides burning.
Just banning things is ineffective and shit.
Regulations are shit and innefective.
Government is tyranny, innefective and shit.

Your ideas are retarded from the get go. If you want to conjure this has something to do with you yourself, well that's not my bad.

How about not using charged language like "retarded" when replying to someone else's posts? The words you use make a difference in how your posts are received. For instance, if you had just replied with this post instead of the "Damn that's some retarded shit" one, you wouldn't be getting the hairy eyeball.

[Samadhi]

You understand the reported rate for domestic violence from police officers is 40% right. And it's not hard to imagine an unreported rate 25% higher. That's half the police there.

That study is laughable and has a sample size of under 10,000 (To be more precise, under 500)

Recent studies have pegged it at being around 16% That is SIXTEEN PERCENT OF CRIMES COMMITTED BY OFFICERS, not 16% of officers committing that crime.

https://kutv.com/news/local/40-of-polic ... study-says

40% when self reported, 16% when an actual arrest was made.

Read your own damn sources.

Methodology matters.

[Kaltovar]

That's going to be fun for you to prove.

Makno is the easiest example. Everyone was big on all the anarchy stuff but it had to become a de facto military dictatorship to survive for even a little bit, and it still got crushed eventually.

Thank you, person who has studied history, for relieving a small sliver of the agony which I am experiencing at this very moment.

[Antityranicals]

Anyway, to answer the question of the OP...

1. Ban abortion. It's murder, folks... It's time we move morally beyond the stone age, and actually ban murder.
2. Decriminalize tax evasion. Maybe if the government's budget is limited to what the people are willing to voluntarily give, it will be more sensible.
3. Ban deficits. If the government can't afford it, it shouldn't get funded.
4. Eliminate all regulations. If somebody is harmed by the behavior of a company or individual, that's what civil courts are for.
5. Decriminalize victimless crimes. If nobody's harmed, there's no reason to prosecute.

1. No it is not. It is time we move morally beyond that let us control other people's bodies. Also this conflicts with 4
2. Unlikely, instead it simply means your government will no longer work at all
3. This assures the government will no longer work given that government does not work like households
4. So what are people who cannot afford a lawyer supposed to do? also, what are you going to do about the unequal access to information

1. I'm gonna differentiate laws and regulations. They are, after all, different things.
2. And if people don't fund a project, than obviously it's not worth it.
3. The fact that the government doesn't work like any private entity is a problem, because every cent it gains from a source other than taxation is a cent which the nation is taxed without even knowing, and that's even worse than mandatory taxation.
4. They're going to hire a lawyer who works free of charge if he loses, and only charges if he wins. I don't exactly understand what unequal access to information has to do with this. After all, if people are being harmed, they know that they're being harmed.