ATTN, Von Zwietracht & other libertariantards

[von]

I tried to do a search, but nothing definitive came up for me:


Has a viable state ever existed that did not levy taxes?

That seems impossible.  How would the government support its operations with no income?

Medieval iceland was such a society.

The function of "the state" was pretty much to rule on lawsuits and codify law. Enforcement of law was up to the citizens (i.e. once the courts rule in your favour and deign that hrothgar owes you 500 pounds of wool to compensate damages, you would be legally cleared of having to pay compensation if hrothgar decided to resist you collecting and you happened to put an axe in his head). There wasnt a death penalty either; many of the crimes we execute for today would be punished with outlawry, which essentially makes the individual in question "open game" for anyone within a juristiction who wants to kill him. Culture at the time made it a great honour to hunt and kill outlaws, much in the same vein that killing a pedophile is something many people can agree with today. Needless to say, aiding an outlaw was punishable by outlawry itself.

A rudimentry social safety net did exist, but like most things in old iceland, was organised at the local level. Essentially, the community would invest a VERY small (its iceland in 900ad...life was hard enough without "taxes") amount of wealth into a sort of community trust fund. If someone fell on hard times, the local community would hold a public court, and vote on whether or not anything should be disbursted and how much...it was principally for widows and orphans.

As for a military; there was none. Being isolated, iceland needed none, and under germanic custom of the times, militaries and warbands were associated with kings, which were a disparaged concept for the icelanders, who prided themselves on their democracy of the people.

Is this a viable model for modern, post/industrial society? No, it relies on a strong adherance to cultural norms/social mores, small, genetically related populations (srsly, i mean literally related, not just "all one race" -- modern icelanders recently released an android app to help people determine whether they are hitting on a distant cousin or not), generally isnt compatable with corporatism or great excesses of wealth, and relies on principals of "might makes right" to some degree.

However, given that it is a pretty good example of the "minnest of minarchies", i think it very well fits the bill for "state that doesnt levy taxes and still functions" (well, at least until the danes came with jesus...jesus breaks every state's will eventually)

It also ended in a very nasty civil war, where the decentralized power of the goðar allowed some to side with the Norwegian King, and do battle to subjugate Iceland under his control.

Which is the other main flaw of decentralized systems - they're highly vulnerable to compromise by centralized systems in certain historical periods, technology and other factors permitting*.  Quasi-anarchist or libertarian societies have a low success rate in wars against centralized state powers.


*Machiavelli described such a system in feudal France, for example, whereby the French nobility were constantly scheming against the throne.  However, the nobility were also scheming against each other even more so, and the French had a more capable military than their contemporaries, making them a somewhat unique example of a decentralized system which still contained enough balancing towards potential threats and military capacity to deal with them.

Again, I cited Iceland as simply an example of a state which existed, wasn't somalia, and didn't levy taxes as we think of them today. It indeed did fail -- eventually, but all societies have failed at one point or another.

[Cain]

And I'm pointing out that end tends to come sooner for decentralized states.  Much sooner.  A way of life isn't worth much if you cannot actually, you know, live it.  Due to being dead from invading armies and your people being made a plaything of foreign powers.

Somalians can also speak with some authority on that subject, I believe.

[Ben Shapiro]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

[von]

And I'm pointing out that end tends to come sooner for decentralized states.  Much sooner.  A way of life isn't worth much if you cannot actually, you know, live it.  Due to being dead from invading armies and your people being made a plaything of foreign powers.

Somalians can also speak with some authority on that subject, I believe.

The soviets and nazis can speak equal volumes concerning the pangs of centralisation...long lasting states those were.

I speak in jest though...both the icelanders and the "modern monster" states of ussr or nsdap deutschland are extremes on both ends...

[Golden Applesauce]

In the Tennessee thread you said this around page 4:

Ok, mabey I did make my statement a bit broad. I'll concede that we need roads...

(snip for brevity)

I'll still hold true to the fact that, as it stands, I don't really benefit from government.

I pay for my water and electricity, I drive to work on roads funded by the corporation I work for, at 9.50/hr, I'm "too rich" to take advantage of any of my government's social welfare systems, I don't have kids, so I don't really concern myself with the school system, and I CC, so when it comes down to it, it's not the police protecting me from crime... in short, I don't really see anything but a few under-maintained in-town roads as being something I fund with taxes that I get a return on.

I'll concede, though, that welfare isn't my problem. Perhaps military spending, police spending or corrections spending should be cut as a "less evil" way to make my paycheck bigger...

30 pages happened after that, which I couldn't be bothered to read closely. Did someone explain to your satisfaction why you're wrong? I don't want to duplicate effort if it's already been covered but Im also in the mood for an argument.

[von]

In the Tennessee you said this around page 4:

Ok, mabey I did make my statement a bit broad. I'll concede that we need roads...

(snip for brevity)

I'll still hold true to the fact that, as it stands, I don't really benefit from government.

I pay for my water and electricity, I drive to work on roads funded by the corporation I work for, at 9.50/hr, I'm "too rich" to take advantage of any of my government's social welfare systems, I don't have kids, so I don't really concern myself with the school system, and I CC, so when it comes down to it, it's not the police protecting me from crime... in short, I don't really see anything but a few under-maintained in-town roads as being something I fund with taxes that I get a return on.

I'll concede, though, that welfare isn't my problem. Perhaps military spending, police spending or corrections spending should be cut as a "less evil" way to make my paycheck bigger...

30 pages happened after that, which I couldn't be bothered to read closely. Did someone explain to your satisfaction why you're wrong? I don't want to duplicate effort if it's already been covered but Im also in the mood for an argument.

Yeah, people explained to me the problems with my ideas in that thread, and ive been weighing in on the flaws of libertardianism theresince.

[Golden Applesauce]

Damn. Bein all reasonable 'n shit.
         \
   

[von]

Damn. Bein all reasonable 'n shit.
         \
   

[The Johnny]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

[Ben Shapiro]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

[von]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

Isnt it obvious? The proper terminology for referring to both of these groups of people are respectively:
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #47
And
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #674

[The Johnny]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

Isnt it obvious? The proper terminology for referring to both of these groups of people are respectively:
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #47
And
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #674

Right, fuck appropiate nomenclature, because they are all the same thing: mentally challenged. Might as well call them useless or disabled, right?

[The Johnny]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

Fair enough, i was reacting more to the "hit on the back of the head" comment.

[von]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

Isnt it obvious? The proper terminology for referring to both of these groups of people are respectively:
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #47
And
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #674

Right, fuck appropiate nomenclature, because they are all the same thing: mentally challenged. Might as well call them useless or disabled, right?

Yes, fuck arguing amongst ourselves over paltry differences in wording. You need to consider mens rea in these sorts of things. Bearman seemed to have been expressing positive interest in whatever cause you were talking about, but the whole fucking thing turned into a shouting match over whether its ok to call retards "mentally challenged" or "super-duper differently abled"...

I mean, the whole spiel seemed like something moronically silly. I could understand if he'd cone in and been all like "hahaha look at the little extra chromosome potatoes as they do the most debased and useless jobs in society hahaha glad I've got a working brain hahaha"...that would have the mens rea of a dickhole trying to insult a group of people...instead, he said something slightly-less-than 100% PC and got yelled at anyway, regardless of expessing interest in something positive.

[Pergamos]

Here, "prevention" means we throw people in prison.  Psychologically speaking, it's non-existent for anyone other than the rich.  We don't even have proper crisis management.  Happy pills, back under your bridge, thank you for your time.

Consider all the school shootings and local bombings a result of a deficient mental health system. Well, maybe thats a bit of a generalization, but i think its a big chunk of the reason.

I think it's because the social stigma of mental illness makes it really convenient to shove those "useless eaters" under the carpet.  Out of sight, out of mind.  It's pretty horrible.

There's some initiatives to create Radio with people with psychiatric conditions, namely, Radio Colifata, Radio Podemos Volar, Radio Vilar de Voz; its very few of them, but what they attempt to do is create social presence and voice, to counteract discrimination, exclusion and stigma. I work in one of those types of initiatives and it seems to be a net positive on the patients. This is kind of the social aspects of treatment that can be done.

Is this the program where people who are mentally challenged, or were hit on the back of the head via accident; are trained to do simple tasks so they can try to fit into society, or live a some what normal life?

Dude, are you trying to minimise the stigma of mental illness and learning difficulties?

Seriously.

It's a simple question.
There's some program out that helps people do simple things so they don't feel left out, or shunned. Simple things such as emptying trash, and tying things together. A few unions are also paying them a living wage.

Look, i got the same vibe from you as Pixie, but i suppose we can assume you are simply uneducated and therefore use irritating labels to adress them.

I dont even know what "mentally challenged" means to you, i suppose you mean people with low IQs and suffer from retardation? As for "hit in the back of the head" is bordering on asshole, its a very crude expression, its appropiate term is neurological damage.

Having said that: psychiatric patients =/= people with retardation =/= neurologically damaged people

We attempt for social reintegration, but that is too much to ask for in the short-term for some of them.

I call people with down syndrome, and/or people with some sort of inherit retardation "mentally challenged". I do it out of courtesy to those people who might be sensitive to those words. I didn't know what to call people who accidentally suffered head trauma, and can't do minimal tasks.

Isnt it obvious? The proper terminology for referring to both of these groups of people are respectively:
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #47
And
Non-confrontational and/or non-exclusive euphemism #674

Right, fuck appropiate nomenclature, because they are all the same thing: mentally challenged. Might as well call them useless or disabled, right?

If I can't think right because I have been hit in the head I am definitely mentally challenged.  That's not the same as mentally retarded. (and yes, I know that word is offensive, but it is offensive for the same reason that we keep changing the word for black.  All retarded means is slow) If I am mentally retarded I am also mentally challenged.