A Geek With Guns gets heavy on us, with regard to the argument government is necessary (a la Hobbes). An excerpt:
When an anarchist brings up the idea of abolishing the state around a statist they are usually met with a very Hobbesian argument. They claim that without the state humans would become vicious beasts roaming the world with the purposes of raping, killing, and stealing. Such a claim is absurd by its very nature:
Now, setting aside the fact that anarchism does not imply an absence of law or defense, and setting aside the fact that Hobbes’ ideas about the state of nature are completely ridiculous, just consider how interesting their claim was in that particular situation. Five armed men sitting in a field dozens and dozens of miles from a police officer having a civil chat about anarchism without any one of us trying to rape, rob or kill any of the others is a rather remarkable thing if Thomas Hobbes is right about human nature. Equally interesting is the fact that none of us feared or even contemplated the possibility of being raped, robbed or killed by anyone out there in the wilds of the Colorado plains that day. Like Coloradoans of the 19th century, we met scores of armed men over the course of the day, none of which we personally knew, and yet it never even crossed any of our minds to be concerned for our chastity, our wealth or our lives.
I’ve never claimed to be an anarchist, perhaps because today’s meme for anarchy consist of Lenin’s useful idiots, touting things like destruction of property and erosion of society as laudable goals. Funny how these folks always end up fomenting some-kind of totalitarian result.
Anyway, if you are looking for something besides Kate Middleton’s chest area on the Internet, you might find this essay of interest. – Guffaw
h/t Christopher Burg
Indeed…
And another thing to mention is the clearly provable fact that MOST of the rape, pillage, fraud, wanton destruction, torture and murder perpetrated in the entire world, in ALL of history, was done by those who claimed to “rule” the people and were directly the result of the various “state” organizations most would call “government.”
I don’t claim to be any sort of “anarchist,” myself. I’m an individual sovereign, self owner/governor. Says the same thing, just without the ambiguity caused by the bomb throwing idiots who stole the term “anarchist” a long time ago.
Or, as I explain further: Not no rules. No RULERS, and no slaves.
Posted by MamaLiberty | October 18, 2012, 7:49 amInteresting (but important) distinction!
Posted by guffaw1952 | October 18, 2012, 8:13 am” Kate Middleton’s chest area”
Link?????
Posted by Robert Fowler | October 18, 2012, 8:50 amWho is Kate and why should I care about looking at her chest area? LOL
Posted by MamaLiberty | October 18, 2012, 8:55 amHAHAHAHAHA!
You shouldn’t (unless you swing that way)
Posted by guffaw1952 | October 18, 2012, 9:48 amHAHAHAHA!
Sorry – got to find it yourself!
Posted by guffaw1952 | October 18, 2012, 9:47 amHobbes could have learned from Robert Heinlein (as should we all) vis-a-vis his remark about an armed society. Polite people have nothing to fear from other polite folk – but those who would prey on the weak should rightly fear everyone else.
Actually, that last sentence describes today’s liberals/Progressives to a T. Hmm. Draw your own conclusions.
Posted by Rev. Paul | October 18, 2012, 9:10 amApt.
Or just draw…
Posted by guffaw1952 | October 18, 2012, 9:49 am