The justification for government

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
This is like saying bleeding people works to cure diseases because it rarely kills people. Even if government "works", the free market works better.

[/ QUOTE ]
Certainly this is true in some instances. Do you think the free market would do better in breaking natural monopolies and preventing cartels?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've read quite a few posts from AC's asking for the ethical justification of democratic government and mixed market economics. (The idea being, government taxes people and jails those who don't pay. Ergo government uses force to get its way.)

Here's the justification: it works.

Here's some information on utility as the measure of ethical justification: utilitarian ethics.

Best regards,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

I"m a utilitarian and think that government is, um... bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

"government"? or "this government"?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under government as it now operates, especially compared to any time in the past.

[/ QUOTE ]

The things needed for human survival are primarily provided by the private sector, not the govt, and would likely be provided with as equal or more capacity without govt.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with the first half of your sentence. Would you mind explaining the reasoning that leads you to conclude that the second half is also true?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's some support:

Nuclear weapons exist and we aren't all dead or enslaved. Prosperity is possible, even relatively common, in western democracies. Life spans are expanding rather than contracting, population growth is slowing, rapists get put in jail (usually), falsely convicted rapists have a better shot of getting OUT of jail than in the past, etc.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under government as it now operates, especially compared to any time in the past.

So, what is the justification for government, at least in the west? "It works."

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see why all of those things should be attributed to the existence of government. Perhaps most of them might have happened anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't prove it's impossible, I'll grant you that. I do think nukes would lead to tyrrany without government, however - "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely", they say, and it seems frighteningly plausible.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've read quite a few posts from AC's asking for the ethical justification of democratic government and mixed market economics. (The idea being, government taxes people and jails those who don't pay. Ergo government uses force to get its way.)

Here's the justification: it works.

Here's some information on utility as the measure of ethical justification: utilitarian ethics.

Best regards,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

I"m a utilitarian and think that government is, um... bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

"government"? or "this government"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's some support:

Nuclear weapons exist and we aren't all dead or enslaved. Prosperity is possible, even relatively common, in western democracies. Life spans are expanding rather than contracting, population growth is slowing, rapists get put in jail (usually), falsely convicted rapists have a better shot of getting OUT of jail than in the past, etc.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under government as it now operates, especially compared to any time in the past.

So, what is the justification for government, at least in the west? "It works."

[/ QUOTE ]

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Prosperity is due to the free market, not its antithesis. You haven't shown that any of the things you assert are good would be worse in the absence of government interventions. All you've done is assert, assert, assert and assume your conclusioon.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under capitalism, to the extent that it exists. They flourish, to the extent they can, despite government, not because of it.

Really. To give government the credit for prosperity? Name one thing government does competently. Other than deathcamps.

[/ QUOTE ]
How many people do you know that have been scalped by Indians? For that matter, how many do you know that have been burned for witchcraft? From my perspective, it seems to do a decent job protecting its citizens from both external and internal aggression.

As far as the market providing everything we need, what do you think would happen with/to nuclear weapons in an AC society?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've read quite a few posts from AC's asking for the ethical justification of democratic government and mixed market economics. (The idea being, government taxes people and jails those who don't pay. Ergo government uses force to get its way.)

Here's the justification: it works.

Here's some information on utility as the measure of ethical justification: utilitarian ethics.

Best regards,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

I"m a utilitarian and think that government is, um... bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

"government"? or "this government"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both.

[/ QUOTE ]
As a utilitarian, why do you think all government is bad?

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's some support:

Nuclear weapons exist and we aren't all dead or enslaved. Prosperity is possible, even relatively common, in western democracies. Life spans are expanding rather than contracting, population growth is slowing, rapists get put in jail (usually), falsely convicted rapists have a better shot of getting OUT of jail than in the past, etc.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under government as it now operates, especially compared to any time in the past.

So, what is the justification for government, at least in the west? "It works."

[/ QUOTE ]

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Prosperity is due to the free market, not its antithesis. You haven't shown that any of the things you assert are good would be worse in the absence of government interventions. All you've done is assert, assert, assert and assume your conclusioon.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under capitalism, to the extent that it exists. They flourish, to the extent they can, despite government, not because of it.

Really. To give government the credit for prosperity? Name one thing government does competently. Other than deathcamps.

[/ QUOTE ]
How many people do you know that have been scalped by Indians? For that matter, how many do you know that have been burned for witchcraft? From my perspective, it seems to do a decent job protecting its citizens from both external and internal aggression.

As far as the market providing everything we need, what do you think would happen with/to nuclear weapons in an AC society?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think would happen to a fluffy stuffed animal puppy dog in AC?

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've read quite a few posts from AC's asking for the ethical justification of democratic government and mixed market economics. (The idea being, government taxes people and jails those who don't pay. Ergo government uses force to get its way.)

Here's the justification: it works.

Here's some information on utility as the measure of ethical justification: utilitarian ethics.

Best regards,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

I"m a utilitarian and think that government is, um... bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

"government"? or "this government"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both.

[/ QUOTE ]
As a utilitarian, why do you think all government is bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a rule utilitarian. I am against the initiation of violence.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's some support:

Nuclear weapons exist and we aren't all dead or enslaved. Prosperity is possible, even relatively common, in western democracies. Life spans are expanding rather than contracting, population growth is slowing, rapists get put in jail (usually), falsely convicted rapists have a better shot of getting OUT of jail than in the past, etc.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under government as it now operates, especially compared to any time in the past.

So, what is the justification for government, at least in the west? "It works."

[/ QUOTE ]

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Prosperity is due to the free market, not its antithesis. You haven't shown that any of the things you assert are good would be worse in the absence of government interventions. All you've done is assert, assert, assert and assume your conclusioon.

The things needed for human survival and human success are flourishing under capitalism, to the extent that it exists. They flourish, to the extent they can, despite government, not because of it.

Really. To give government the credit for prosperity? Name one thing government does competently. Other than deathcamps.

[/ QUOTE ]
How many people do you know that have been scalped by Indians? For that matter, how many do you know that have been burned for witchcraft? From my perspective, it seems to do a decent job protecting its citizens from both external and internal aggression.

As far as the market providing everything we need, what do you think would happen with/to nuclear weapons in an AC society?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think would happen to a fluffy stuffed animal puppy dog in AC?

[/ QUOTE ]
It would be used to kill or enslave huge numbers of people, turning the AC society into a thugocracy.

Actually no, I don't think that would happen with a fluffy stuffed animal puppy dog. It might happen with nukes though. And unfortunately, as long as you accept utilitarian success as a moral justification, "I don't know whether AC will work, but let's just do it" is morally equivalent to saying "I don't care whether AC is right or wrong."