Message from @Diokun
Discord ID: 522315828499316736
Keep in mind for most people here it's like 3 am
ok
autocracy bro?
100%
absolute monarchy, or other form of 1 man-rule
Seems I was mistaken
@Nikitis Look at the numbers. How many rich people are there and how rich are they? They cannot carry the poor. Thinking that is retarded and shows some sadistic socialistic tendencies... Robin Hood isn't the solution, education is.
I like bureaucratic monarchy like 19th century autocracy style
law is bad (seriously). will of man is better. law is interpreted. which means it doesn't exist really.
@Donaldus Triumphus same... Sleep is racist I guess<:GWfroggyBlobWokeThink:398570327942365195>
if something interpretable isn't really in existence then nothing is, that's a steep slope down to solipsism
fucking sleep, invading our country
From the beginning of the U.S., there was some recognition that government should be concerned about the dangers of powerful corporations, but the existence of a corporation is an act of government, and regulation of business is always done with the best interests of business in mind. Historically, when a regulatory agency is formed, the regulated industry manages to control it.
If government could be separated from the interests of the propertied class, and could grant primacy to the living people, it would no longer “govern” in the sense that we have known. Communication, education, and the protection of privacy would be its most important functions. Instead of prosecuting Aaron Swartz for liberating information from JSTOR, government would prevent the privatization of things that are properly public property. It would prevent the creation and enforcement of myths that make illegitimate power possible.
“The growing wealth aquired by them [corporations] never fails to be a source of abuses.”
–President James Madison
Lol,
Divine law exists and its absolute. man law doesn't exist. it is a fantasy. that is why the rule of man is not only better, but the only thing that actually exist. even in a "law" country
yeah I'm on board with laws, I like having a constitution, but it is meaningless without good men as rulers
divine right to rule worked well, I hope it isn't obsolete now
divine law exists and is absolute if you accept the existence of external divinity, which I would say many don't
its sad that even the "white hats" are in favor of the rule of law (aka constitution and checks and balances)
It is worrisome how incompatible modern population is becoming with traditionalist systems
well, without religion you can't really have a good country. so trying to form a country with the agreement of those people seems like either a waste of time, or a failure
@Deleted User exactly!
@Nikitis Quotes are meaningless fluff without context. And government cannot be separated from stuff like that if politicians are rich people or celebrities.
Government needs to return to what it was. A volunteer job of service to community. Meant only to pool resources for maintenance and keeping crime to a minimum.
Well I'll be heading off for the night, you gents enjoy your discussion. I will read it tomorrow morning
@Deleted User that happens with a lot of traditionalist systems. They become outdated and are exposed for flaws, so it gets improved.
@Donaldus Triumphus cheers lol
night @Donaldus Triumphus may you crush your enemies in your dreams
nah, it seems people have bad leaders, so they conclude they shouldn't have leaders anymore...
That isn't a dream
GM: So you don’t view this as a big government/small government dilemma, as it’s often framed, but whose interests the government is ultimately serving?
RP: Powerful individuals and their corporations are simply aware that small streamlined governments are easier to control. The “small government advocates” want to privatize all the constructive functions — water, roads, schools, and medicine — and to limit government to taxing, policing, and war-making, but with the unstated function of defining property rights with a class bias. The power functions, taxing, policing, and war-making, can’t be privatized, because they have no constructive social function. The destructive powers of corporations were widely recognized 200 years ago, but skilled ideological construction has shifted the fear of bigness away from corporations, toward “government,” when government threatened to interfere with their power. Constructive social functions can be performed cooperatively, and borders or size limitations are probably irrelevant.
hahahah honestly @Donaldus Triumphus is a g
its like bitcoins folks. because our centralized system is a fraud, they conclude that every centralized system is bad, which is idiotic.
its like: you have a bad nurse. conclusion: we should no longer have nurses.
yeah that's why I don't understand most forms of anarchy
if the goal is population happiness
@Nikitis governments are mostly serving their own political interests now. And utilities can be privatised and have significant social functions.
From whence have you acquired that cancerous fluff?
😂😂😂😂
Ok then
Sad sad stuff
Governments serve social functions, denial of that is pretty silly. Roads, water, access to healthcare, many functions need a centralized body that doesn't care about profit