Search the Community

Google is the world's largest breeding ground for sociopaths who see morals as obstacles to overcome, rather than paths to follow. Their utter indifference to the ethical repercussions and potential consequences of their actions is beyond all comprehension. Stefan, if you see this, I need to tell you that I strongly disagree with you about artificial intelligence. It is far more capable than you seem to think. Please watch the videos listed below and make a video on it at your earliest convenience. Thank you.

Hi all, I want to touch on a subject that I think most of us are familiar with. In discussions with statists, anti-libertarians and others, even just open minded intellectuals (so recognising moral and ethics), at one moment a false trap is set to disgrace the call for libertarianism/end of statism. Many times the question comes up "how would this and that be arranged in a libertarian society?" (see for instance a call for "how will the poor and homeless be fed?" or "how would X work in a libertarian society?"). This utopian trap is a false question for two main reasons. 1 - it is impossible to portray a libertarian society from the current situation. It would be like someone in 1880 asking "how would X work in 1990?" when all the factors are different. It is the positioning of an unknown future based on the present day factors, technical developments, risks and status of society. The "picture" of a stateless society cannot be painted with the pencils and paint that are created in a non- or even anti-free (statist) situation. 2 - the question itself, the desire for an utopia, is a question based on statist doctrine; statists want to "arrange" societies, want to "create and impose things using force". For an anarchist/libertarian/voluntaryist that is an intrinsically impossible standpoint, as the idea of the philosophy is that things are not "arranged", yet follow the natural order, the outcome is based on what people do, how they behave and is thus a logical, non-imposed situation. Stefan in one of his videos (please comment which one it was, I've seen so many) comments on it, but I think it should be spread more and more and even be a standard counterargument against the statists with their imposed arrangements they think of to modify societey. It's a trap set by those people because they can then attack this strawman. Questions like "how would X work, how should Y be arranged, what happens with Z in a stateless society" are trapping questions. My answer would be (and that's what Stefan pointed out in that video as well): "I don't know, and why should I?" I am curious to hear your thoughts, experiences and methods of rebuttal of these intrinsically impossible and trapping questions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22763464