10 top reasons why organised crime would be better than the State

[Hawker]

So you feel that being controlled by people who kidnap, rape and murder of a girl is better than a system where you elect a government.  How does that fit your posts about the NAP?

But I did not elect the government we have now, the vast majority of government employees are not elected, anyway, and if you think government does not kidnap, and murder, and if not actively participate, then at least turn a blind eye to rape, to say nothing of torture, then you are more naive than you think I am.

I suggest you run for election.  You may be surprised to find that even the people you totally disagree with are decent guys who want to make the world a better place.

[1713592473]

1713592473

[1713592473]

1713592473

[1713592473]

1713592473

[1713592473]

1713592473

[myrkul]

I suggest you run for election.  You may be surprised to find that even the people you totally disagree with are decent guys who want to make the world a better place.

Be that as it may, forcing their decisions on other people is not the way to do it....

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

[myrkul]

If you haven't yet, you must watch :
The Machinery Of Freedom by David Friedman (Illustrated summary) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jTYkdEU_B4o#

This is getting cross-posted in the other threads. If you doubt the fairness of NAP and market anarchy, This will be a good use of 23 of your minutes.

[FirstAscent]

Kidnapping is usually done for profit; not for political ends.  To describe the sadists who do that as "honourable" and preferable to an elected government is fatuous.

I agree completely, but again, I think you have mistaken terrorist organizations for organized crime. She was referring to this organization, and ones like it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Mafia

Yes.  When I lived in Boston, all the coin machines in bars came from one mafia family, the Bulgers.  I'm told another Italian family owned the right to dispose of trash.  If you wanted to compete, you would have to kill them. If they disapproved of you, they would kidnap and kill you.  Whitey Bulger is on trial for the death of a girl who was raped and strangled.  Before that, for years, one of his enforcers "owned" the girl and her mother and had been having his way with her since her puberty. 

That's honourable?  That's how you would like the country to be run? Really?

It is how he'd like it. I specifically stated in another thread that NAP would devolve (or evolve) into a mafia like environment. Buying defense and security would be buying protection from a mafia family, and the prices would be high.

[Hawker]

...snip...

It is how he'd like it. I specifically stated in another thread that NAP would devolve (or evolve) into a mafia like environment. Buying defense and security would be buying protection from a mafia family, and the prices would be high.

myrkul has sort of left reality so far behind it isn't really worth it anymore.  One day his dream world has arbitration which can't compel attendance.  The next day it can.  In this thread, he says guys who kidnap, rape and kill girls are preferable to guys who are elected.  What's the point in debating that?

[myrkul]

myrkul has sort of left reality so far behind it isn't really worth it anymore.  One day his dream world has arbitration which can't compel attendance.  The next day it can.  In this thread, he says guys who kidnap, rape and kill girls are preferable to guys who are elected.  What's the point in debating that?

You make a fine point. Of course, that point is based on a complete misunderstanding of my case....Perhaps if you did research of the topic on your own instead of just relying on my (admittedly sometimes imperfect) defense of it, you would understand better. Just a few posts up, there's an excellent link, which would be a fine way to spend a small segment of your evening.

[FirstAscent]

myrkul has sort of left reality so far behind it isn't really worth it anymore.  One day his dream world has arbitration which can't compel attendance.  The next day it can.  In this thread, he says guys who kidnap, rape and kill girls are preferable to guys who are elected.  What's the point in debating that?

You make a fine point. Of course, that point is based on a complete misunderstanding of my case....Perhaps if you did research of the topic on your own instead of just relying on my (admittedly sometimes imperfect) defense of it, you would understand better. Just a few posts up, there's an excellent link, which would be a fine way to spend a small segment of your evening.

I'm doing research on David Friedman. Please show me where his theories factor in environmental issues. I want to see that he has strong knowledge in that field - not just a superficial understanding.

[FirstAscent]

More research on David Friedman...

Consider the cost of a rights enforcement agency. In today's system, with a police force, we might have 1,000 officers for a particular geographical region. They cost X dollars.

In Friedman's system, he says we'll have a choice between many agencies. How many? One? That's not a choice. How about five? So for equivalent coverage, that's 5,000 officers. So the cost to the customer is 5X. Wonderful.

Oh, there's an alternative. The rights defense agencies contract with the same 1,000 officers. Paid mercenaries, so to speak. Strange. But at least the cost is down to X again.

Oh, and regarding Friedman's knowledge of the environment, I'm still waiting for it.

[Realpra]

+10 for Hawker.

I get why people are hating on governments, but we seriously need to try to find some solutions, not just abandon all society/civilization.

[grondilu]

I get why people are hating on governments, but we seriously need to try to find some solutions, not just abandon all society/civilization.

That's too easy.  You can not just defend something by arguying that without it it would be the end of civilization.  I just don't agree with this prediction.

Get rid of governments and something else will emerge.  Maybe it will be chaos, maybe it will be just another form of government.  I don't know.  What I know is that I'm so fed up with elected governments that I want to accept the risk of trying something else.

[Hawker]

I get why people are hating on governments, but we seriously need to try to find some solutions, not just abandon all society/civilization.

That's too easy.  You can not just defend something by arguying that without it it would be the end of civilization.  I just don't agree with this prediction.

Get rid of governments and something else will emerge.  Maybe it will be chaos, maybe it will be just another form of government.  I don't know.  What I know is that I'm so fed up with elected governments that I want to accept the risk of trying something else.

Good plan.  North Korean and Syria have skipped the farce of electing governments and its great in every...oh wait, its a bloody nightmare.

[FreeMoney]

I find this repulsive. Having a family member murdered by a rogue cartel member because he refused to do their bidding makes me realize more and more that most libertarians are sociopaths.

[edit] Present company excepted, of course!

I'm sorry to hear.

Do you think you would feel opposite though if your family member was killed by an American soldier?

[cbeast]

The Mafia isn't meaningfully different from the Roman Empire in character, motivation or methods (Italians conducting violence for profit)... and the Roman Empire provided pretty good governance (Northern Europe learned civilization from them).

The reason that 'organized crime' is problematic today is because they have to compete with much stronger national governments... making it a high-risk low-reward game, that attracts the desperate and stupid - the smart people just go into 'legitimate' business and professions.  Notice the children of successful mobsters tend to go legit.  Also the Mafia's fragile hold on power makes it necessary for them to use brutal and desperate methods - the Mafia can't imprison a person for example, or garnish wages, so their retributions take 'other' forms.

'Rule by the Mafia' is simply absolute monarchy/autocracy and would operate and evolve identically.  And monarchy actually worked quite well.  Western civilization rose on monarchy, and is in decline under democracy.

That is a very romantic notion of thugs. Monarchy OTOH is a function of feudalistic and perpetual war. I don't see much technological development coming out of feudal nations today or historically. And don't play the NAZI card, their technology was stolen and very limited in scope.

I find this repulsive. Having a family member murdered by a rogue cartel member because he refused to do their bidding makes me realize more and more that most libertarians are sociopaths.

[edit] Present company excepted, of course!

I'm sorry to hear.

Do you think you would feel opposite though if your family member was killed by an American soldier?

I think Wikileaks shows that sociopathy is tolerated, if not encouraged in the military. Besides, soldiers have nothing to do with domestic law enforcement.

[R-]

Convention of geniuses.

[cbeast]

Convention of geniuses.

Scanning your history of posts leads me to believe you spent a great deal of time on this one. While it has roughly the same number of sentences as most of your posts (1), it includes two polysyllabic words. Thank you for your input!

[R-]

Scanning your history of posts leads me...

Thank you for taking the time out of your day to scan my posts #1 fan.

[cbeast]

Scanning your history of posts leads me...

Thank you for taking the time out of your day to scan my posts #1 fan.

It was my pleasure. I consider it my responsibility to at least give the benefit of a doubt to someone before adding to the ignore list. It's nothing personal. Actually, I agree with your sentiment, but prefer to keep opinions like that to myself at the risk of being misconstrued. There are almost always exceptions, and as such it behooves one to avoid flames of vague generalities.

[R-]

Cbeast, I apologize - allow me to express my sorrow by sending you 1 bitcoin.

[cbeast]

Cbeast, I apologize - allow me to express my sorrow by sending you 1 bitcoin.

Though your generosity is touching, such a heartfelt expression is apology enough. Bitcoin accepted at the donation address on my weblink are intended for charitable purpose, of course.

[R-]

Cbeast, I apologize - allow me to express my sorrow by sending you 1 bitcoin.

Though your generosity is touching, such a heartfelt expression is apology enough. Bitcoin accepted at the donation address on my weblink are intended for charitable purpose, of course.

I am overjoyed you accept my apology. One thing remains in my mind however; I thought I was on your ignore list.