As written by a mortal

So it is mortals who have given God this authority.

As claimed so by mortals

And so, humans have given God with authority, true or otherwise

Humans could simply be incorrect and not give God this authority

Yeah pretty cringe, someone should have false gods if they wanna.

No, even if we presuppose God is real I don't see why people should be disallowed from worshipping false gods.

Systemic control, cultural education in the case of the Torah, lotsa reasons

And your conclusion presupposes those the accuracy of the resurrection story (which conflicts with itself in its multiple accounts), and the existence of God.

If God exists, then why can't we worship gods that aren't real?

Yeah I reject your presuppositions then

Also yes, the two accounts of the resurrection have conflicting narratives at multiple points.

Been a while since I've looked into it so I can't enumerate specifics at this moment

A business is a government you doof

Why can't we be allowed to go do heaven even if we don't believe in God?

A business makes collective decisions for those it employs. Therefore, it governs. Therefore, it is government.

And welfare is?

Exactly, a voluntary government

It still gives services

In exchange for taxation

Irrelevant

You can... move...

Additionally, many governments allow you to opt-out of social programs. Making this programs optional. Public healthcare in general being an example.

Yeah, as a form of resource distribution because we've either democratically decided it, or an authoritarian imposed it. Sometimes both.

I wish to abolish taxation eventually too y'know

Literally can but okay

I mean

VENEZUELA WAS CAPITALIST HAHAHHAHAHA

Love the venezuela memes

Yes they were

Literally had privately owned business

Just nationalized the oil industry

Okay, so could you own a privately owned business and operate this business for personal profit in Venezuela. Yes or no.

*nationalized

Different than socialized, incidentally. Social democrats like to pretend state ownership is collective ownership which is a funny meme

I'm a socialist, I don't want the state owning shit my dude

Lol, co-ops btfo

Syndicalism who?

Anarchism where?

That's... Yes and mostly no?

Imagine thinking worker ownership and state ownership are the same lol

Didn't realize I was talking to an ML

Fundamentally, you're conflating socialism with economic totalitarianism @Gbyws

Many socialists would argue economic totalitarianism qualifies as socialism if the state is beholden to the people

***I disagree***

I want economic democracy, a economy owned and operated by the workers who use them for the benefit of these workers.

Not by the state, which is by definition detached from the workers.

I'm an anarchist, I wish to abolish the state, why would I make it **more powerful** by letting it own the economic means of production?

It does for nationalized industry, yes

Who owns the NHS Bleach?

For the same reason seizing power from monarchs by force to establish democracy is moral.

Is democracy preferable not to monarchy?

The NHS is owned by the state, which is why the UK government is considering sell it. Kinda hard to sell something you don't own.

They can (and do) forcibly deny access to necessities that others require. And extort things from them in exchange for these necessities

The force is the threat of death if you do not

Starvation is just as lethal as a gun, is it not?

Because the choice between death and action is not a choice. It's a coercion

Currently yes

I aim to fix that

Or just make a society where everyone can get what they need to survive.

Do you understand the difference between government and state?

Many possible routes, mostly just focused on creating the next best system. We can figure out details as we get closer to an ideal

Who said I would be forcing anybody to do anything? You can make incentives. I'm not completely opposed to limited markets y'know

So let's make a system that can do that.

I'm an anarchist yes

I'm against lassez-faire *capitalism*

In the same way I'm against dictators being allowed to do what they want

Democracy doesn't have to collapse to dictatorship, no

The most stable democracies are those that disperse power

Innovation is driven by many, many things beyond market pressures. The Wright Brothers only took flight because they were promised government bounty. The Soviets were way ahead of the US for more of the Space Race. This growth came before modern capitalism, and will continue well past it.

Based

Gross and wrong but okay

Right so

That was government making incentive

This system can exist even if necessities are public goods

I'm not against a market for luxuries between now and when automation can provide for a post-scarcity society.

Just if economic governmentation must exist, which is what a business is, it ought to be made in democratic fashion

Perhaps, and if such then my plans for systems after a democratic market will simply have to rest

But I don't believe this to be meaningfully the case

The end goal is malleable to reality, and if impossible then other plans will be made.

And you think anarchist capitalism would not deteriorate into neofeudalism so

Power breeds power. Capital breeds capital. Coercion and monopolize thereof, and encouraged by the way the market demands growth and the effectiveness of monopoly

Eventually a business too will attempt to make itself be the only possible option just as the state does

Businesses are goverment

Government can be voluntary you doof

*a government

Not THE government

"conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (an organization or people)."

Businesses literally do this

They govern

If it makes collective decisions for others it governs. Thus is government.

No you can govern in a voluntary fashion

So is a consensus state not a goverment?

Let's say

Hypothetically

Wait are you conflating state and government?

These aren't the same

Which one?

State or government?

Fuck it both