|
I'm flattered by the name drop, but when I'm not getting drawn into arguments on this forum I've already got a project I'm working on, and I don't have the coding chops for alt client work. Good luck to you.
|
|
|
|
Its not an analogy bittertea - its real life. The guy thought that he could opt out of the requirement to pay car insurance. The law thought otherwise. Guess who won?
The slave thought that he could opt out of the requirement to work for free. The law thought otherwise. Guess who won? |
|
|
|
That's like saying "I never agreed to the law of gravity. There has to be something somewhere that says I gave up my right to fly." Two different meanings of the word law. Human laws (created), despite having the same name, are fundamentally different than laws of nature (discovered).
As humans, we are born into societies and and if we do something that harms the society, it will defend itself. In the example of the guy without car insurance, he ended up paying his fine. Opting out is not available as a choice in court.
"As slaves, we are born into slavery and and if we do something that harms the slaveowner, he will defend himself. In the example of the slave who ran away, he ended up getting whipped. Opting out is not available as a choice on the plantation." Hawker fails to grasp the concept of analogy in 3, 2, 1... |
|
|
|
But I'm willing to bet one of these 3 possibilities holds true.
So put your money where your mouth is. I'll bet against you. https://btfuture.com/ |
|
|
|
However both diamonds and bitcoin receive their scarcity from being in the hands of relatively few people which purposefully control the market to give them higher value.
Wrong. Bitcoins are scarce (not infinite) because the algorithm to create Bitcoins (generation subsidy) tends toward zero and is published (open source). Diamonds are not truly scarce, since they can be synthesized at or near the cost of mining them naturally. |
|
|
|
|
Alright, I give up, you guys are hopeless and I have better things to do.
|
|
|
|
Only in the most ridiculously pedantic technical sense. So, choosing to work a wage paying job, even if you have few other options (for whatever reason), is akin to slavery. However, being forced at gunpoint to hand over a percentage of your earnings, no matter from where they are derived, is nothing like slavery whatsoever? Wage slavery, on the other hand, can and has produced actual, verifiable living conditions very similar to those suffered by slaves.
I know which one of those concerns me more. The one that actually happens.
Can you give me an example of wage slavery being imposed by entities not sponsored and given privilege by a nation-state? Taxation doesn't happen!? |
|
|
|
Watch the whole video. The enclosure mistake is later. I have. What time? I think you're also taking the term too literally, it doesn't necessarily apply only to the so-named movement in England. Enclosure or inclosure is the process which ends traditional rights such as mowing meadows for hay, or grazing livestock on common land. Once enclosed, these uses of the land become restricted to the owner, and it ceases to be common land. And the first 30 seconds is historically inaccurate. There is no record of a passive people anywhere that was taken over by malicious masters. The record is of religiously inspired militias, who's members are happy to die for their cause, taking control of territories. That's also what you see today when states break down. Its the guys who are happy to die for their beliefs are the big issue - not the guys who would prefer to stay home and watch TV.
You're completely missing the point. The people stay home and watch TV because they are afraid of death, injury, imprisonment. Otherwise, they would be out there fighting for their freedom, not sitting at home in a cage of their own making. |
|
|
|
Yes, finding a new job when everything you're qualified to do pays the same shitty wage. Sounds viable. Almost as viable as becoming an entrepreneur on a sustenance-level wage working 18 hours a day.
It's all about CHOICE, even if your choice is between abject shit and a pie-in-the-sky dream that, pretty much by definition, can only be realized by a tiny fraction of the populace.
Can you please answer my question? Do you also see a similarity between taxation and slavery? |
|
|
|
Circular logic. In a democracy, the people own the state.
In what meaningful way? |
|
|
|
In the first 30 seconds, he announces that the fear of death is the big problem of society. In my experience, its people who are willing to die for their beliefs are the big problem - not the ones who are afraid of dying. Not a historical inaccuracy, a difference of opinion. Do you truly claim that humans are not alone among animals (as far as we can currently tell) in fearing death and future loss? He descibes an "enclosure" movement as covering all Europe. It didn't - Ireland never had one and as far as I know it was an English/Scottish thing. You truly hear exactly what you want to hear. He says nothing about Europe. Here is what he says: Instead of being directly owned, peasants farmed land that they could retain as long as they paid off the local warlords. This model eventually broke down due to the continual subdivision of productive land and was destroyed during the enclosure movement when land was consolidated and hundreds of thousands of peasants were kicked off their ancestral land because new farming techniques made larger farms more productive with fewer people.
Emphasized in the quote is my answer to your question of "ownership". That same model is used today, but replace "peasants" with "citizens" and "warlords" with "governments". |
|
|
|
What does "ownership" mean to you?
Means you can kill it without fear of retribution At first, I was going to dispute this, but upon second thought, this seems like a good partial definition of ownership. I would say that owning an object means you can do anything you want with it, up to and including destroying it. I would argue that this definition fits the relationship between the fictional entity known as the State (and those that make decisions in its name) and its citizens. |
|
|
|
Still waiting for you to tell me how moving into politics would allow me own people.
Still waiting for you to clue me in to concrete historical inaccuracies in The Story of Your Enslavement. Since I'm not a hypocrite, I will also answer your question (with a question). What does "ownership" mean to you? |
|
|
|
Do you notice that the comparison was used to justify real slavery?
So? There is a fundamental difference between "wage slavery" and slavery. "Wage slaves" can always choose to leave and find some other way to feed themselves, whether it's becoming an entrepreneur, finding a better paying job, etc. |
|
|
|
You're happy being a slave. That's great, good for you. I'm not, yet you give the slavemaster money to make sure I'm a slave too. Fuck you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slaverySimilarities between wage labor and slavery were noted at least as early as Cicero. Before the American Civil War, Southern defenders of African American slavery invoked the concept to favorably compare the condition of their slaves to workers in the North. Do you also see a similarity between taxation and slavery? |
|
|
|
It's a provocative notion, but he didn't believe it or he would not have been so outspoken.
What do you mean by this? |
|
|
|
Except they get a living wage, health care, and retirement.
If I had to choose, I'd rather be owned by the guy who gives me that than the one who gives me minimum wage and a coupon for 10% off a turkey at Christmas.
You're happy being a slave. That's great, good for you. I'm not, yet you give the slavemaster money to make sure I'm a slave too. Fuck you. |
|
|
|
Reading that text made me think that bitcoin regulation is similar to the regulation of "air guitars".
You are correct. There is no reason that bitcoin cannot be traded as spoken phrases, dance moves, or even air guitar licks. Omg, private keys encoded as air guitar licks, using something like a miniature Kinect to sign a transaction... that would be amazing. |
|
|
|
Bureaucrats are poorly paid public employees. Are you seriously saying that the clerks in the local department of motor vehicles own you?
Wow, can you be more disingenuous? The clerks at the DMV are to the line cooks at McDonald's as politicians are to CEOs. Yes, the politicians own you, and with the cooperation or ignorance of a small number of people, can cast a magic spell (law) and turn you into a criminal, lock you in jail, or execute you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
