It is much easier to bear any such attacks when we understand that all our opponents are just simpletons. They have deeply flawed personalities and cannot use that faculty which makes them most human - reason. They are in essence animalistic and their thinking simplistic. They think pragmatically and can't comprehend abstract concepts of morality or ethics. The great Friedrich Nietzsche characterizes such people within his field of "slavish morality". He writes of these slaves that according to them: "the good man is the safe man", "slave-morality is essentially the morality of utility", and, most insightfully, "everywhere that slave- morality gains the ascendancy, language shows a tendency to approximate the significations of the words 'good' and 'stupid'". We need to realize that we bear the banner of truth through a field of lies.
We must take here to heart the words of Lord Tennyson:
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.
And strengthen our pure hearts against evil!
Dude, I don’t know where you get this stuff about me trying to paint you as greedy, selfish, or evil when I have always believed instinctively since the moment I met you to be the opposite and you to be noble, warm, and nice. If my morality is arbitrary and my economics faulty, I am sorry but I am like mostly everyone else and I can’t change that. If you want me to stop commenting than just tell me in the next response and I'll never comment again (period).
ReplyDeleteIf a socialist still exists in anarcho-capitalist society and social Darwinism has failed to breed him out, he is not an anomaly of natural selection if he is still a rational fully functioning human and just derives his logic from bad morals. And if socialists are anomalies to natural private property laws and the logic derived from it, and if the majority of the world and its peoples are socialistic, then there are more anomalies to social Darwinism than there are examples of the rule currently living in this world. That is why I’m reluctant to say social Darwinism would be the correct means to an end of anarcho-capitalist for humanity. That is why, if I can’t accept the means as a valid and sound premise, I cannot accept the ends as perfectly such and my reluctance not to question or comment on this more “perfect society” is not an attack against it, but a validation of my humanity.
And my reluctance to believe that private firms and private judges would not make the same horrific mistakes as public ones do is another reason I fear anarchy, because it implies chaos as a farfetched consequence that could not occur and does not assume the irrationality or immorality of the individual to exist within its framing of a capitalism free market for very long because it assumes that social Darwinism has naturally bred most of these anomalies out. Perhaps this could only exist in a post statist world that is devoid of the lesser components of our humanity (hedonism, anger, selfishness, greed), but that is so highly unlikely that I am unwilling to take that alternative risk and I agree with Shakespeare that these traits are simply everlasting constants that are immutable to the nature of man. And like voluntary communism, the long term stability and effectiveness of an anarcho-capitalism society raises at least some small measure of doubt among the average person like me as to whether or not it would better serve functionally (or safer) than what we have already. Of course governance of any kind has moral and logical contradictions built in, but I don’t expect perfection even along man’s term of engagement. And if my morality is evil, than my shared values with man are evil too and I'm sorry that I and most other people can't see what you do.
Rob, the above blog post was not about you. It was about ignorant and stupid people in general. Please stop taking criticism of your majoritarian positions (however infantile they may be) personally.
ReplyDelete