Take the Red Pill by Runaway Slave | Dec 3, 2008 | Democracy, Libertarian Curmudgeon | 4 comments 4 Comments Katha on December 4, 2008 at 5:07 pm The novel I am trying to write, is predicated on the idea that humans are livestock– but not the property of “elite” humans, rather they are being manipulated by meatpackers from another planet. They are cleverly using human ringers, like the “judas goat,” to pull us out of the countryside and assemble us in the slaughterhouse (aka residential zones) using religion and politics to do the job. Want more? I can make more. I get inspiration every time I open the newspaper. Reply j.p. on December 4, 2008 at 11:42 am Watched it. Decent explication. The soundtrack made me want to open a vein. Reply Hal on December 4, 2008 at 9:42 am It’s always good to hear from someone who expects me to end thousands of years of philosophical debate with a few pithy wisecracks. I can only hope I’m up to the task. The video amounts to anarchist propaganda, if there can be such a thing. What the point is, however, is that concentrated power always devolves to collectivism. Of all the isms and parties and political philosophies you might come across the all boil down to the conflict between collectivism and individualism. Governments are dangerous and self-serving because in the name of collective benefit we allow government to do things that would be crimes if they were done by individuals. Human nature is such that if most people if allowed, or worse, encouraged, to act like criminals, will do so. I recommend this video as an intro to the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJqSsrFDiSA Reply j.p. in ohio on December 3, 2008 at 11:49 pm Hal, I always enjoy how you ruin my day. But if I could play devil’s advocate for a minute… To some degree, every person bases his or her actions on some governing principle or principles. Maybe a less “conspiratorial” explanation for the propagation of States is that a certain population determines through an act of volition that some governing principle(s), though perhaps not strictly axiomatic, will be binding on each and every one, even in cases where the principle might be opposed to any individual’s self-interest? I quote John Stuart Mill: “All that makes existence valuable to anyone depends on the enforcement of restraints upon the actions of other people. Some rules of conduct, therefore, must be imposed…” Americans agree to submit themselves to the rule of law, for example, even though it’s possible that such submission may have negative consequences if one should need to, say, steal a loaf of bread to feed her hungry children. Now, I hate paying taxes just as much- if not ten times more- than the next guy. And I am personally aware of how the state can abuse its power once obtained. But my question to you is, how would you “make the fitting adjustment between individual independence and social control”? (P.S. I’ve baited you a bit here. Mill goes on to say that “What these rules should be is the principal question in human affairs… but one of those which least progress has been made in resolving.” So I guess I expect you to end thousands of years of philosophical debate in your reply:) Reply Leave a Reply to j.p. Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment * Name * Email * Website Δ This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.