Government Monopoly, no, not a new board game.

	Duration: 05:30 minutes Upload Time: 07-05-21 02:44:09 User: g0at :::: Favorites
Description: yup oh and for half the questions I got, watch these 2 videos on " how it all will work". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1h_itXrjzk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_IevRX8laU
Comments
lordmetroid ::: Favorites 1 AM watching :D 07-05-24 18:55:26 _____________________________________________________
DeletedDelusion ::: Favorites Would there be a common standart? If yes, who wil set the standarts? Will the same issue be treated the same way by all DRO´s? Did I get you right that a DRO isn´t thought as an complimentary organisation to the state? Will it depend on the culture? What are the requirement that will enable a smooth realisation of a change of system to a DRO? 07-05-22 17:17:30 _____________________________________________________
DeletedDelusion ::: Favorites Isn´t, according to the Maslov pyramid, security the most imortant issue for people? A state suppresses the will of people, yes, but it gives the illusion of stability. Even if it´s only a illusion it comforts people. Sounds like religion, doesn´t it? 07-05-21 16:49:03 _____________________________________________________
wpem ::: Favorites The country's not going to have a massive upheaval all of a sudden and suddenly become the country of your dreams. It has to be worked on slowly and gradually by the people within it. That is the only way anything can be accomplished. Just folding your arms and saying "I'll Have Nothing To Do With This!" isn't going to change anything. 07-05-21 15:40:23 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites Watch my DRO and DRO objection video. 07-05-21 14:40:16 _____________________________________________________
DeletedDelusion ::: Favorites Doesn´t work with sheeps though. If somehow, maybe over generations, the rate of people willing to take part sinks, DRO won´t work. Not everybody is as motivated as you are to take part. I admire your optimism, I hope you are right, but you have to convince me. 07-05-21 16:56:42 _____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites Deleted Delusion, you raise a good point. I'd first like to point out that we need to rid people of the idea that there is a skydaddy before attempting to introduce this concept :) 07-05-21 17:05:41 _____________________________________________________
DeletedDelusion ::: Favorites Well, I consider myself atheist agnostic. It´s just that in Switzerland we have normaly around 2-4 national reverendums per year, and I could atain 2-4 town meetings. I do take part of the reveremdums, but I have to confess I never attaind a town meeting. If people are not going to vote, then why should they act as DRO´s after work? 07-05-21 17:19:04 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites Working for a DRO? it would be a job. Selecting a DRO? Would not be any harder than anything else. When you oppose something you could file a dispute. And let me tell you, your DRO will isten to you. If your dispute is popular, the DRO WILL CHANGE, or they will go out of business. I think people would be less apathetic if they saw change in the organization compared to our current Government. 07-05-22 00:39:49 _____________________________________________________
michaelus00sin ::: Favorites i dunno, i think you credit people too much. You previously shot down the walmart monopoly statment for this (people wont stand for it) but they do. don't know if you caught "walmart, the high cost of low price" But walmart is a growing giant and a complete shit head... but people keep going there. How would that change with DRO's? 07-05-22 07:58:45 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites I never have said anything about business monopolys. I used the fast food industry as an example to how government monopolys are different. 07-05-22 15:36:04 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites OH and watch my objection to DRO video. The reason it is different is becasue you have a universal FEAR 07-05-22 15:36:33 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites They do not use force against crimminals unless they are in the act of doing the crime. The reputation factor would even allow crimminals to join a VOLUNTARY jail or prison. Nobody would protect them. 07-05-21 14:39:05 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites You can refine the model all you want. But there will always be violence. Stat A Will be violent. So, an anarcho capatilist society would NOT initiate violence. If they were being invaded they would have an army. 07-05-21 14:38:19 _____________________________________________________
g0at ::: Favorites You need to check out my Objections to DRO video. In theory, you are wrong. 07-05-21 14:34:25 _____________________________________________________
joekarim87 ::: Favorites Again you can't provide a service for what you can't sell. And protection from the largest militia is nothing a DRO can stop. The DROs can attempt to quell the situation, but it would be a failed effort if it truly if the militia truly is the biggest army. 07-05-21 15:04:10 _____________________________________________________
michaelus00sin ::: Favorites i dunno... if you excempt self deffence, then your not far from accepting "a premptive strike" (spelling?) and then it's just about justifying violence, which aparantly you can't? I'm at real odds with this anarchy lark, i got a book on it, but i got lots of other stuff to get through before i can pick it up... i'll be on you then 07-05-21 12:52:01 _____________________________________________________
neutrinoide ::: Favorites Premptive strike is initiation of force. I attack you because I think you are a danger for me. Which is usually bullshit. The only think you need is nuclear missile and no one will attack you. If you look at the world. The country that no one attack is the one with nuclear capacity. 07-05-21 13:22:22 _____________________________________________________
michaelus00sin ::: Favorites na, this is greyer than you think. If a hostile force where attacking people left and right and growing stronger and stronger you would wait untill they attacked you, and just hope they were still weak enough to give you a fighting chance? This sounds earily like pasifisim (spelling again?) Which is essentialy, inaction, which can be as imoral as initiating viloence. Blanket statments are no good here. 07-05-21 13:30:15 _____________________________________________________
neutrinoide ::: Favorites Ah ok, I was talking about self-defence only.The grey area you talk about is part of the problem of the state itself. What anarchist try to remove is the legitimacy of an entity that will allow to accumulate wealth by none voluntary. That open a big social economic are where such scenarion will be hard to happen because war are only profitable if you force people to pay for it.Like I said, not enough space here to touch every aspect of it. 07-05-21 13:51:04 _____________________________________________________