The murder of children in AC land

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, you didn't. Moorobot?

[/ QUOTE ]

Below the belt, even for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. Moorobot is fond of the "long, tedious post" = "demonstrated" equivilence. And many suspect this guy is a gimmick account. I didn't, but now I think it might be a 2nd-level gimmick; someone who creates a gimmick account with the intention of it being discovered to be a gimmick, but with the hope that those who discover it is a gimmick incorrectly guess the owner of the account.

For example, you might create a gimmick account to spout poorly-formulated arguments for your opponent's positions in order to discredit them, but since this technique is old and busted, you have to kick it up a notch. Now you've got to create a gimmick account to spout poorly-forumlated arguments for your OWN positions, so that people will think it's a gimmick account controlled by your opponents, who will lose credibility as they become associated with old, crappy, ineffective propoganda techniques.

[ALawPoker]

I think dead babies in dumpsters is at least more creative than Bill Gates buying up all the roads.

Stephen, can you imagine what might happen if Bill Gates owned the dumpster!? He could claim that the dead body is his property, and choose not to turn it over for a funeral. Where is the justice? He may even go all necrophilia on us. Thank God we have Moral Clarity to stop Bill Gates from doing such horrible, horrible things.

I really do not want Bill Gates to have sex with innocent dead babies in a dumpster in my streets.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone. Wouldn't you? Or is there something wrong with you?
There was a time when child prostitution was perfectly acceptable. It isnt now based on our societal values changing, not because of capitalism. There was even an emperor who had sex with children then threw them off a cliff when he got tired of them (2000 years ago). How are you with "anarcho-capitalism" going to stop individuals from deciding that this is once again acceptable, when the only principle you are guided by is capitalism, without "laws".

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, you'll probably find that it was exactly capitalism, or rising standards of living due to capitalism, that lead to the discouraging of child prostitution. Children resort to prostitution and crime when it is economically necessary for their family's survival.

And you stop people who abuse children much the same way as you do now. If you find out about someone abusing a child, you report the abusers to groups who work to look after children. This could be a local type of "police", an advocate group, church, etc. That group then works through the courts (yes, there'd be courts and laws!) and dispute-resolution groups and the child may be taken away from the abusers.

And keep in mind, AC is not nor does it anywhere claim to be a utopia where everyone is nice to each other and has ponies and hotdogs aplenty. There will be bad people (just as there are now) who will do bad things (just as they do now). But considering that an AC society would probably have decent standards of living, problems like child-abuse would probably not be as prevalent a problem as there is currently.

Funny thing is that you could dig back about a year or so and find me making the same critiques against AC regarding children. But I think that I just didn't put much thought into my criticisms and was hung up on my own incredulity. Try thinking harder about your (and this goes to all those arguing against AC) criticisms and what a society without a government might do to resolve such problems.

Maybe a waste of a 6k post, but oh well.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh. Moorobot is fond of the "long, tedious post" = "demonstrated" equivilence. And many suspect this guy is a gimmick account. I didn't, but now I think it might be a 2nd-level gimmick; someone who creates a gimmick account with the intention of it being discovered to be a gimmick, but with the hope that those who discover it is a gimmick incorrectly guess the owner of the account.

For example, you might create a gimmick account to spout poorly-formulated arguments for your opponent's positions in order to discredit them, but since this technique is old and busted, you have to kick it up a notch. Now you've got to create a gimmick account to spout poorly-forumlated arguments for your OWN positions, so that people will think it's a gimmick account controlled by your opponents, who will lose credibility as they become associated with old, crappy, ineffective propoganda techniques.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post of the Day.

[The once and future king]

In the post where he demonstrated that AC lacks moral clarity he concluded that GWB was a beacon of moral clarity.

Also Morobot does actualy make arguements. As much as I have criticised AC in the past even I find the op's efforts hillarious.

[frizzfreeling]

Thankyou BCPVP, for the non-derogatory post. After coming back from work, I read more into Capitalism, which I freely admit I am not an expert of. I now see what the other posters were talking about and I concede the arguement and retract my statements about having children as related to capitalism. My position was incorrect.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Thankyou BCPVP, for the non-derogatory post. After coming back from work, I read more into Capitalism, which I freely admit I am not an expert of. I now see what the other posters were talking about and I concede the arguement and retract my statements about having children as related to capitalism. My position was incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]
No problem. Some of my ideological brethern here can have their springs wound too tight by some of the more trollish who post here. I'm certainly no expert in capitalism either. I'd sitll consider myself a newb at a lot of these topics.