Its like trying to decide the lesser of two evils. So both are inherently immoral. I would not want to live around Mexican cartel members. They won't imprison you if you cross them, they will cut you in half with a chainsaw. At least if I get caught with drugs by by the FED I might get out alive. Organised criminal gangs are not to be justified in anyway, be it government gangsters or mafia gangsters. Both seek to unbalance for greed and power.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I didn't justify either government in my post. In fact, I admitted the immorality of both. That said, I lived in the U.S. and now I live among the cartel. I can testify that although your statement may be sincere, it's absolutely unfounded and wrong. It's much safer to live around cartels than U.S. cops. Every 8 hours an American cop kills a citizen. That's not happening here.
There are more kills from mafia than cops for sure. You just don't here about it. Nothing is absolute. Its about ones own relative and subjective experience. Your perception is that government is worse than mafia. Whereas my perception is that mafia are worse. I think most would agree with me too. Mafia exist only to exploit material and power gains, whereas most police have positive agenda to help people and attend to peoples needs actively. This is obvious. So please don't be so quick just to say someones opinion is wrong when really I was more correct than yourself. With your attitude and perceptions I would say you are part of the mafia. There is no other reason why you would say what you do.
@onesunbeingnow have you lost your mind. First, you are acting as if the cartels are a mafia. They are not a mafia. They are a government. Also, in this post I was comparing the entire U.S. government to the Mexican cartels. I was not comparing only the American police to the Mexican cartels. However, the American police have killed more Americans than were killed during the entire Iraq war. That's significant. The U.S. government has murdered millions more than the cartel so you are wrong. Most people would not agree with you because the evidence shows I'm right. Only bias persons such as government employees and those who believe cable news is real would agree. "Police having a positive agenda" to help people is the most ridiculous comment I have heard all year. As a former drug cop, one of the best in the nation, I can tell you that cops don't give a shit about the public. All they care about is making arrests and making money for their departments. Finally, accusing me of being in the mafia is ad hominem and so far from the truth, I'm embarrassed for you. I have been investigated and reported by every major news source in the world. I am continually monitored by the police for my activism. If I were in the mafia, I would have already been in prison. I absolutely certain you are bias because you are a cop or you are married to one. Go fuck yourself for that accusation and stay off my blog. Weirdo.
Listen. Cartels have killed more and have no positive impact on society. Fact. Sure police do a lot of bad things, but at least they do help people more than any cartel ever would. This is simple and true. Sorry if you cant see that.
I don’t like to get personal. Because then it just gets negative and you get lost in your own mind. I like to have fun and be free. But to be frank I don’t care who you think you are or your story, I have the same view toward myself. We are all entitled to our opinion, and I happen to think my perception it’s a very reasonable and obviously true one.
Also it would be nice if you weren’t so aggressive and abusive too. As my mafia statement was a joke anyway. Acting like that really discredits you entirely. You shouldn’t take things so seriously. If you are serious you may as well be dead already.
btw @onesunbeingnow, with your attitude and perceptions I would say you are part of the government.... and there is nothing more immoral than that.
Government stands for govern your mental capacity. So yes I am the government because I choose how my mental capacity is governed. I don't let it be governed by some imaginary idea of a 'outside government'. My life is perfect. I have no use for a fearful and negative idea about some spooky controlling government groups who somehow affect my life. That is insane. I would rather take full responsibility for my world by knowing that I create my world around me. As the correct answer when I ask the question "where is the world right now?" is: inside my imagination. As each person wakes up to the idea of self-governance the ideas of government and anarchism will become forgotten.
Mafia only exists BECAUSE of government. Without government, there would be no need for mafia who profit from getting "illegal" plants to paying, voluntary customers. So, your preference of govt over mafia only just makes mafia exist. If you and others had no desire for government, or stopped bowing to them (there is no difference between mafia and govt except size) then we'd have neither govt nor mafia and we'd have a world of peace and prosperity like we've never known it.
hahaha you really believe that huh...very funny indeed...we would still have organised gangs who exploit others without something we today know as government. There will always be some story about such things. Anarchist are funny. Naive and funny.
Correction: The mafia as they exist today only exist because of the improper, illegitimate government we have today.
As Frederick Bastiat wrote in "The Law" there would still be a "government," but it would be infinitesimal compared to its current size, and it would solely concern itself with sociopaths who were guilty (or seemingly guilty, prior to the proper jury trial) of force and/or fraud (coercion: the initiated realistic threat of force or initiated, non-retaliatory force itself).
Voluntaryists don't oppose government. They just want smarter government; ie: self-governance in the voluntary sphere. Does every government today fall so far short of this standard as to make abolition of all governance a viable interim goal? Sure. A good case could be made for that. Historically, this places me alongside Emma Goldman, Thoreau, and Lysander Spooner.
BTW: Spooner was not an anarchist. He was an abolitionist, a libertarian, and a minarchist. The same is true of Bastiat and Thoreau.
Government is an immune system, only. When it is disordered, the republic dies, the same way a human dies when infected with AIDS or any other auto-immune disorder. The current government we have is like AIDS or cancer. But that doesn't mean that immune systems are bad. They're only bad when they have nothing in common with, or "are the opposite of," the best version of themselves.
Note: I'm a voluntaryist libertarian who is agnostic in the pointless (unresolvable) debate over re-labeling the pattern-found-in-nature that is sometimes called "anarchy" and sometimes called "minarchy,"depending on one's Historical and Scientific education level. So I can interface with people who inconsistently defend the American idea as considered by the Founders, I often call myself a "minarchist," much as Eliezer Yudkowsky does (although perhaps I'm more radical than he is).
Because the chain doesn't go any deeper, this reply is to the onesunbeingnow post directly below your post.
onesunbeingnow is right that sociopathy would still exist, as would organized sociopathic criminal entities. However, they would only be a small fraction as powerful under a proper, western government. This is because they currently have ("income derived from risk avoidance in supplying vices" + "income derived from direct theft/extortion") whereas under a just government, they would only have "income derived from direct theft/extortion." Even a simpleton can see that "income derived from risk avoidance in supplying vices" is vastly, vastly, vastly greater than "income derived from direct theft/extortion."
This is why we need a "downvote" button. Of course, here's a clarification of your comment: The police in the USA are criminals. After all, they meet the formal definition: they initiate force to steal property of people who have not, and never will be, found guilty by a proper jury of a valid, 2-part "corpus delicti." With no valid, 2-part "corpus" (same referent as in the term "habeas corpus"), the accused, even if found guilty, has not been convicted by a proper, random, common-law jury.
So, those who defend the police actually are defending the "economic incentivization" wing of the mafia. They are simply a part of the mafia that relies heavily on brainwashing uneducated and unphilosophical dupes who graduated from the government youth propaganda camps known as "public schools."
Sounds like I might be describing you, although I suspect Berwick is correct, and that you are a government employee or personally invested in your relations to a government employee.
Didn't read any of that. Judging by the length of the posts it looks like you care too much and are a slave. I was just commenting and having fun. But looks like people get too serious and negative. I'm free, I don't care about anything :)
onesunbeingnow wrote: "Didn't read any of that. Judging by the length of the posts it looks like you care too much and are a slave. I was just commenting and having fun. But looks like people get too serious and negative. I'm free, I don't care about anything :)"
...Just like most barnyard animals. Although this does make me curious to find the "block" button here.
Good thing you stated that you don't take your comments (or anything else) seriously. Have fun in your idea-less world, you mindless meat-bot. :)
You are like a person who ran from a knight and is now living with a dragon and are now saying that Dragons are nonviolent. I could find someone who was forced to run from the cartels and is now living in the United States who would say the exact opposet of what you are saying in this post.
Exactly. What these two are saying is ridiculous, not to to mention the disgusting vulgarity from Barry.
Your economic illiteracy is more vulgar than anything Barry has ever said. If you cannot see that the drug cartels are paid to circumvent law enforcement, then you know nothing about basic economics.
This free book might help you: https://books.google.com/books?id=DZKE3-pV1AYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Law&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3iMaiqMvOAhXMQSYKHWHvCn0Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
The per-capita death rate was higher in Mexico in 2006-2016, was it not? (I understand it was over 111,000 people murdered by Cartels from 2006 to 2012 alone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War#Casualties
Also, numerous VICE and other "alt media" have covered the insane number of shootings in Juarez, etc.)
--I don't think the individual witnesses in the prior pieces are lying. Whether they are "pro-west" propaganda is also up for question.
Also: the Mexican police will gladly ruin your life if you have a gun, which is why the civilian defense groups don't trust the government there, and are also targeted by them, in addition to the cartels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grupos_de_Autodefensa_Comunitaria
Also: there is even less pretence at due process in Mexico than in the USA. (For example, a friend of mine who is a grade-school principal in Mexico was abducted and tortured by Mexican police for days because he had the same name as someone on their wanted list. When they realized they had the wrong guy, they just let him go, black and blue from head to toe, and one of his testicles ruptured.)
The cartels themselves are a symptom of US prohibition. Therefore, the blame lies squarely at the feet of non-libertarian US voters, so in that regard, the lower-hierarchical-level decision-maker is less morally culpable than the highest-hierarchical-level decision-maker.
I agree with you, to that extent. (Nothing you said in this essay contradicts that, but it also isn't quite as clear. For example: The cartels also extort, and kill those they can't extort, which is a far lesser extortion than the street cops in Chicago and New York are guilty of, when they steal someone's warez for not having a "vending license," or kill them, as they did Eric Garner.)
The agency of the US voter is higher than that of the cartels, who are opportunists who take advantage of the stupidity of the US voter to engage in the risk/reward paradigm created by prohibition. That said, the cartels are also full of sociopaths, and sociopaths will trend toward the greatest waste and ruin of life, by default. The ruin extends far beyond the drug trade, due to the fact that once you're controlling territory, that control allows many more immoral income streams
--extortion and theft being primaries.The tragedy is immense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War#Casualties ...And many of the victims are completely innocent of wrongdoing. In fact, they are likely the easiest targets. Those who try to establish a true free market are also likely to be killed.
We might agree about this: The first responsibility/culpability for the entire mess lies with the intellectually lazy, unphilosophical US voter.
Its weird, you talk about things like mexico's high murder rate, which you say the cartels are responsible for. Then you blame the United States for Mexico's problems because we've outlawed the drugs they import to us. The United States are the buyers in a huge drug market, no doubt about that. But a country is responsible for its own problems, so by my logic, street gangs in Chicago are the fault of the united states, even though they may be selling drugs imported from Mexican cartels, whereas Mexico is responsible for its cartel problem. They have a shitty weak government that can't stop the cartels from operating, and the responsibility for that lies primarily with each individual Mexican. If your country is a piece of shit, and you haven't opted out of the concept of the nation state, you are partially responsible for your country being a piece of shit. What I am saying is that the country with the highest standard of living and the best governing structure, whatever the latter means to you, is responsible for that achievement, they built that culture, that nation, and that standard of living, while the country that is its polar opposet is also responsible for building themselves a shithole.