Not offended at all. :D
I see your point of not putting someones protection from his own irresponsibility above other peoples' freedom.
I strongly agree with that in general, but still believe that in some extreme cases (like heroin and LSD legality/illegality) exceptions should be made, because:
- The vast majority of us get weak or irresponsible sometimes, especially while young.
- Although I vote for much higher individual freedom than found in the current systems, I question the righteousness of allowing absolute individual freedom. For example, if someone gets refused by a girl that he loves dearly, gets drunk/drugged, and tries to jump off a bridge and kill himself, I would try to prevent him. In a way, I am denying him his individual freedom to choose to jump off the bridge, but he will most probably be grateful to me for that later. I think that the same applies to preventing people from using the most addictive and harmful drugs - you are basically saving or vastly improving their lives in the long run, as well as the lives of people close to them.
1 ok we do dum stuff but laws are not going to prevent that.
2/3 You can not allow me absolute individual freedom?
you can question of course the rightiousness of my individual freedom, in reality (not in some future prediction) and I encourage you to do so, so that when I harm someone in reality ( or maybe myself) you might take rightious action to stop the harm I inflict by; restricting my freedom or end my freedom altogether.
Do you really think you need permission to be free or I. Who oh who is that a pure devine being to give me that permission? I have to laugh a little here not at you but because knowing how this mental slave trap works, made me more free and happy, that anything else in the world.
I'm sorry but I have absolute freedom. Not even for the "good cause" of preventing things that might happen or protecting me against myself, you can of course protect people against the results in reality like jumping of a bridge.
Just a little test ;)
I think they should ban alchohol altoghether, because then I save you/them from, that they might use hard drugs while not being conscious. Or they will not get in a fight or steal. I bet they thank me later that I prevented them from that.
End of test lol.
It is most awful to live in a prison made by you fellow human beings and if there is one thing that might convince me to take drugs, it is that. To escape the pressure of slavery inflicted by my fellow human beings.
(I edited a few mistake and added a bit for clarification)
I agree with you that laws often fail to prevent people from doing dumb things and that is a very real problem. As I wrote in the article, the Dutch are among the lowest users of marijuana in Europe, despite the Netherlands' policy on soft drugs being one of the most liberal on the continent.
I think that sometimes we have to predict future at least a little bit because if we would act only after something happens, in the vast majority of the cases we would be able to very little or nothing. Saving a person that has already jumped off the bridge or is already on heroin is quite difficult or even impossible.
You got me with your test, I admit that! :D
Your test shows how difficult it is to choose where to draw the line, if a person thinks that we should have some rules but not too many, like in my case.
I would accept the absolute freedom and anarchy idea immediately, should someone give me a good explanation on how would we solve:
Unless these two can be somehow solved even in the total anarchy, I choose to give up some of my individual freedom.
You give up some of your individual freedom? I don't get that sentence.
You can predict the future but you can not use violence to forbit me something.
That is not "your individual freedom"
And hiring someone to do the violence for you makes it very easy, and there are always sociopaths and sadist who want to do that for you. But if you hire someone you are responsible for the things he does in your name. For example you can not hire a hitman that represents you and your wishes/wants/opinions and who violates or kills me if i don't obey them eventually
I think you know that if he kills me because I don't obey your wishes etc. that you are to blame. That's what happens exactly in statism.
Let me try it this way; What do you personally want to have done to me personally if I use hard drugs. (not stealing violating and agressing
or murdering at all)
Also
In statism you have no individual freedom that's a misconception. In statism/collectevism you don't give up your individual freedom either, it's taken by (thread of) violence.
You are indoctrinated (you may not believe it lol) in that individual freedom is that you have the freedom choose/vote for someone else to do things which would be seen as immoral as you would do them yourself, but magically become moral as many individuals think their opinion justifies them to give a violence institution permission ( which they can't) to do exactly those things that all the individuals in the group have no right to do.
This may sound stange but the gang is already there. You just don't see it because you are always 100% obedient to all the rules. The whip comes out if you don't obey, and your fellow slaves will enjoy the beating of you and will say you should have not broken the rules and defend yourself against your punishers, It's your own fault. Some (a lot actually)even justify you being murdered. (It's horrific to see people who say they care for you give answers)
I understand your points; liberty is one of the basic human needs, just like air, water, food, health and safety. Statism is a flawed system without a doubt, whether it's comes as autocracy, democracy, communism, socialism or other form.
However, I also believe that the total anarchy is a flawed system too - because of the two huge problems explained in my previous comment for which I don't see a solution. Thus, it seems to me that we are choosing between two (or more) flawed systems, and it's up to each of us to thing about what is the least flawed system and to advocate that system.
Thank you for your answers .
The only thing is anarchy is not a political system. You can have voluntary organisation against your problems, which I see as a problem too. Not in the sence of volunteer.
I could give you some of my solutions for those problem but that would totally miss the point of what I'm trying to accomplish.
I hope that you maybe think about what you would do about those problems how to solve them and maybe see that it maybe possible in the future too realize those plans. But when noone ever thinks about and says those thing the other people will never think about. Just as that the idea that slavery is evil started in someones mind and he or she expressed it so that more people thought about that.
I thank you for your patience to discuss this difficult subject. And wish you the best.
Peace/Vrede ;)
I am thinking about the eventual solutions as we speak.
Thank you for the great discussion, @wordsword.
Cheers! : )