Is Democracy a bad idea? | Bitcointalksearch.org

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: Explodicle on October 13, 2011, 04:53:50 PM

Quote from: Elwar on October 13, 2011, 10:36:52 AM

I still find it funny that this thread continues on.

If you support democracy, then you should realize that this thread has already determined that democracy is a bad idea via a democratic vote.

The majority has decided.

You've repeated this enough to make me worry that you may actually be serious, that you may actually think an anonymous poll on a libertarian forum means anything. Perhaps we should ask the Ubuntu forums if Microsoft Windows is a good idea?

There are plenty of smart objections against democracy. Read them. Frederic and I might not agree but at least he has engaged in intelligent, good-faith discussion. Not this wiseass strawman argument ad nauseum.

I comment because I think it is funny.

I made this thread as a joke to make a point. I guess it went over people's heads.

Explodicle

hero member

Activity: 950

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Elwar on October 13, 2011, 10:36:52 AM

I still find it funny that this thread continues on.

If you support democracy, then you should realize that this thread has already determined that democracy is a bad idea via a democratic vote.

The majority has decided.

You've repeated this enough to make me worry that you may actually be serious, that you may actually think an anonymous poll on a libertarian forum means anything. Perhaps we should ask the Ubuntu forums if Microsoft Windows is a good idea?

There are plenty of smart objections against democracy. Read them. Frederic and I might not agree but at least he has engaged in intelligent, good-faith discussion. Not this wiseass strawman argument ad nauseum.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Elwar on October 13, 2011, 10:36:52 AM

I still find it funny that this thread continues on.

If you support democracy, then you should realize that this thread has already determined that democracy is a bad idea via a democratic vote.

The majority has decided.

That has already been dealt with.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.555781

gopher

full member

Activity: 135

Merit: 100

Quote from: Elwar on October 13, 2011, 10:36:52 AM

I still find it funny that this thread continues on.

If you support democracy, then you should realize that this thread has already determined that democracy is a bad idea via a democratic vote.

The majority has decided.

Even if the majority had decided on something, it still does not make them right!

I see the real question being not about the democracy being a bad or a good idea, but if the democracy is the system that the majority wants?

My personal opinion - the majority population on the planet definitely does not want to live in a true democratic system.

Once that is determined, from there on the democracy being a bad idea turns into an academic discussion.

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

I still find it funny that this thread continues on.

If you support democracy, then you should realize that this thread has already determined that democracy is a bad idea via a democratic vote.

The majority has decided.

Explodicle

hero member

Activity: 950

Merit: 1001

Quote from: compro01 on October 13, 2011, 10:02:58 AM

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:43:48 PM

True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

Neither can True Communism.

Not only can it, but it MUST lead to dictatorship. Ask Marx if you don't believe me. Grin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

compro01

hero member

Activity: 590

Merit: 500

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:43:48 PM

True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

Neither can True Communism.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: netrin on October 12, 2011, 09:27:18 AM

Uh, NAP is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle ?

Correct.

netrin

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 251

FirstBits: 168Bc

Uh, NAP is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle ?

Explodicle

hero member

Activity: 950

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Hawker on October 12, 2011, 03:28:56 AM

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 05:43:30 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 04:53:54 PM

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

Try again. I made no mention of republicans or socialists.

Self-defense and all the contractual consensual behavior that leads up to it, does not produce a dictatorship except and unless you violate the NAP. Amassing all the various protections and weapons that could possibly be invented in the advent of potential threat also does not create a dictatorship.

Your confusing individual or group defensive preparedness with collective conscription.

Correct me if I am wrong. The NAP is voluntary. The guy with an army may not agree to it. Your whole argument is based on the assumption that having fought his way to being the most powerful army, he will then decide to start following the NAP. If he doesn't, then you have replaced democracy with dictatorship.

You're not the only one who sees this coming. Everyone would. That's why people would buy insurance ahead of time to use against him if needed, for example hiring a foreign army to help fight the evil local army. The main reason this hasn't happened after historical conquests is because they lacked a robust and independent financial system.

Hunterbunter

hero member

Activity: 994

Merit: 1000

If you're going to make a poll like this, at least make apparent the definition of democracy you're using. There are many.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 05:43:30 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 04:53:54 PM

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

Try again. I made no mention of republicans or socialists.

Self-defense and all the contractual consensual behavior that leads up to it, does not produce a dictatorship except and unless you violate the NAP. Amassing all the various protections and weapons that could possibly be invented in the advent of potential threat also does not create a dictatorship.

Your confusing individual or group defensive preparedness with collective conscription.

Correct me if I am wrong. The NAP is voluntary. The guy with an army may not agree to it. Your whole argument is based on the assumption that having fought his way to being the most powerful army, he will then decide to start following the NAP. If he doesn't, then you have replaced democracy with dictatorship.

FredericBastiat

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 04:53:54 PM

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

Try again. I made no mention of republicans or socialists.

Self-defense and all the contractual consensual behavior that leads up to it, does not produce a dictatorship except and unless you violate the NAP. Amassing all the various protections and weapons that could possibly be invented in the advent of potential threat also does not create a dictatorship.

Your confusing individual or group defensive preparedness with collective conscription.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: hmongotaku on October 11, 2011, 04:27:01 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 04:05:34 PM

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:43:48 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:31:34 PM

Libertarianism is only a stepping stone to dictatorship so not really worth taking seriously.

Try doing your homework before you respond. True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

so from your quote: republicans are dictators and democrats are socialist!?!~

Try again. I made no mention of republicans or socialists.

hmongotaku

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 04:05:34 PM

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:43:48 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:31:34 PM

Libertarianism is only a stepping stone to dictatorship so not really worth taking seriously.

Try doing your homework before you respond. True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

so from your quote: republicans are dictators and democrats are socialist!?!~

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:43:48 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:31:34 PM

Libertarianism is only a stepping stone to dictatorship so not really worth taking seriously.

Try doing your homework before you respond. True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

From what we have established so far, true libertarianism means that you can make your own army. You can get tanks and aircraft from a foreign power. You can make your own laws and your own courts. Only if someone else has a more powerful army, can you lose. Otherwise, true libertarianism means that you are a dictator.

If I have missed something here, feel free to tell me.

FredericBastiat

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:31:34 PM

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:29:46 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:25:39 PM

Then we are in agreement.

Any system will suffer from regulatory capture [except libertarian]. All you can do is mistrust every regulatory institution. Good governance requires a cynical public

Don't forget the Libs. I mistrust everyone who doesn't agree with the NAP in principle.

Libertarianism is only a stepping stone to dictatorship so not really worth taking seriously.

Try doing your homework before you respond. True libertarianism cannot possibly lead to dictatorship. Epic fail.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: FredericBastiat on October 11, 2011, 03:29:46 PM

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:25:39 PM

Then we are in agreement.

Any system will suffer from regulatory capture [except libertarian]. All you can do is mistrust every regulatory institution. Good governance requires a cynical public

Don't forget the Libs. I mistrust everyone who doesn't agree with the NAP in principle.

Libertarianism is only a stepping stone to dictatorship so not really worth taking seriously.

FredericBastiat

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: Hawker on October 11, 2011, 03:25:39 PM

Then we are in agreement.

Any system will suffer from regulatory capture [except libertarian]. All you can do is mistrust every regulatory institution. Good governance requires a cynical public

Don't forget the Libs. I mistrust everyone who doesn't agree with the NAP in principle.

Hawker

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Explodicle on October 11, 2011, 01:16:10 PM

No one used anonymous electronic markets in that village. They did not employ any technological capitalist solution similar to the one described here.

I'm not disputing that democracy is the best system, and certainly never meant to imply dictatorship even comes close, although I'm of the opinion that crypto-anarchy wouldn't be so bad. They might not even send political opponents to Guantanamo Bay to be tortured without trial.

The potential downside of representative democracy is that our representatives can be bought by corporations and wealthy people who write their own laws, strip away our freedoms, and poison the Earth. They are killing all of us right now. The potential upside of crypto-anarchy is to end that.

Then we are in agreement.

Any system will suffer from regulatory capture. All you can do is mistrust every regulatory institution. Good governance requires a cynical public

Topic: Is Democracy a bad idea? (Read 7088 times)