Dnia niedziela, 24 stycznia 2016 21:26:58 juan pisze:
Ok rysiek, I'm not sure when/if I'm going to reply to all your evasive bullshit.
Well, would you call "evasive bullshit" a situation where somebody does not reply to simple yes/no questions without a good reason? :)
What I'm certainly going to do is use one of your 'tricks'.
What tricks? I am trying to ask precise questions to understand your point of view.
Tell me rysiek. How does your government or any government operate.
What happens to people who don't obey your government. Show some decency and intellectual honesty and give a concise, honest answer.
They get fined, jailed, or (worst case scenario) killed. Your point? While you ponder this, here are some questions that I have asked you in the previous e-mail, for your consideration: (regarding private companies getting licence plate data) Do you see no potential problems/dangers in private sector having such huge databases of who was moving where, when? (regarding governments doing bad shit and then giving the orphans candy) Does that mean that orphans should not take the government's candy? Does that mean that orphans that *do* take that candy are "sellouts" and are to be ostracized or considered akin to government agents? (regarding mafioso being killed by mafia he's a member of) My question is: does the sheer fact of being killed by the organisation the mafioso was a *voluntary* member of, without him knowing that he's going to be killed, change his "membership status" from voluntary to non-voluntary? (regarding civil society) So, what's *your* definition* of "civil society", then? (regarding Greenpeace and WWF) - could you define "coercive aims"? - are Greenpeace and WWF civil society organisations, or not? (regarding "militant society" as opposed to "civil society") Could you define "militant society" and perhaps draw the line between the two? (regarding the definition of "civil society") Wait, does your definition of "civil society" *require* an organisation to be a "libertarian voluntarist" one? And what would that mean? (regarding possibility of corrupt private companies) So we can have private companies that are corrupt? Can they be corrupt without government's help? (regarding governments being "bad") Why just governments? What makes Teh Gummint so different from mafia on one hand, and a huge multinational corporation with their own armed security force and/or an effective way of coercing governments to do their bidding on the other? (regarding projects taking government money) Before we dive into this rabbit hole, do I understand correctly that above you just agreed that: 1. in and of itself the fact that a project (say, Tor) takes government money, does not *automagically* mean that the project is corrupt/coercive/in bed/etc? 2. that it is *possible* that such a project (not necessarily Tor; some hypothetical project) can have good outcome *despite* taking money from the government? (regarding "power always bad, needs to be checked, regardless of who has it)
Fine. Sort of...
Elaborate on the "sort of" please. (regarding the government being the "by far worst problem) But you do agree it is not the *only* problem? (regarding government propaganda) What about focusing on things that are not as bad as the government, but *not* denying that government is a big problem? (regarding "government has to go") What, in your view, would happen once Teh Gummint is gone, then? -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147