|
|
#61
11-10-2007, 07:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree wit
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying the state is correct in protecting marriage? [/ QUOTE ] If that is something that people would want the state to do, then yes. [ QUOTE ] Are you saying AC is correct in protecting marriage? [/ QUOTE ] How would that be possible? [ QUOTE ] Are you saying protecting marriage will cause more aggression than not protecting marriage? [/ QUOTE ] The level of protection, and the way it's protected are important. But that is what I'm speculating. [ QUOTE ] Are you saying aggression will only arise under an AC platform and not under a state platform? [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely not. Most state platforms increase aggression. [ QUOTE ] Can you explain why the state is better at dealing with this aggression? [/ QUOTE ] I make no statement like that. [ QUOTE ] Did you know the lack of private property in China has led to an over expanding population which forced the communist government to restrict birth rates, thereby culturally influencing a greater distortion in the rate of male versus female births due to a male growth bias? [/ QUOTE ] It depends. What is "culturally influences birth rates" a euphanism for. 
|
|
#62
11-10-2007, 07:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree wit
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] WTF? This doesn't remotely follow. More likely: Men are attracted to really sexy women. Very few women are really sexy. So you would see women in a position to attract multiple men much more so then the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] Biologically, because of certain factors such as pregnancy men look to get multiple women pregnant, were as women typically look for the best single mate. [/ QUOTE ] No, "biologically" women look for the best environment to care for their children. A gaggle of men makes for a far better environment than a single one. Always someone availble to pick the kids up from soccer practice. Always someone available to take care of them if you want to go out and do something else. It's win, win, win, win. [/ QUOTE ]So you believe that there would be more, grating my ridiculous premise that monogamy would disappear to some extent, would be more common then the other type? [/ QUOTE ] No, I don't see why either would be more likely or something else altogether.
|
|
#63
11-10-2007, 07:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree wit
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] WTF? This doesn't remotely follow. More likely: Men are attracted to really sexy women. Very few women are really sexy. So you would see women in a position to attract multiple men much more so then the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] Biologically, because of certain factors such as pregnancy men look to get multiple women pregnant, were as women typically look for the best single mate. [/ QUOTE ] No, "biologically" women look for the best environment to care for their children. A gaggle of men makes for a far better environment than a single one. Always someone availble to pick the kids up from soccer practice. Always someone available to take care of them if you want to go out and do something else. It's win, win, win, win. [/ QUOTE ]So you believe that there would be more, grating my ridiculous premise that monogamy would disappear to some extent, would be more common then the other type? [/ QUOTE ] No, I don't see why either would be more likely or something else altogether. [/ QUOTE ]Historically it's the more seen. Biologically it also makes more sense.
|
|
#64
11-10-2007, 07:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree wit
[ QUOTE ]
How would that be possible? [/ QUOTE ] AC implies that there are private property institution. AC society would protect private contracts through private security, private courts and arbitration agencies. [ QUOTE ] The level of protection, and the way it's protected are important. But that is what I'm speculating. [/ QUOTE ] In what way? What is the precise positive effect that the state has and that AC doesnt such that the effect force a collapse of an AC society but a not a statist one? [ QUOTE ] Absolutely not. Most state platforms increase aggression. [/ QUOTE ] Im losing you on whatever your point is. [ QUOTE ] It depends. What is "culturally influences birth rates" a euphanism for. [/ QUOTE ] Im just saying the society has a cultural bias for male children when there is only one to choose from. The government's restriction on birth rates, a consequence of communist social policies, has set the stage for the ultimate aggression since there will be a variety greater population of men versus women.
|
|
#65
11-10-2007, 08:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree wit
[ QUOTE ]
AC implies that there are private property institution. AC society would protect private contracts through private security, private courts and arbitration agencies. [/ QUOTE ] That's all fine and great but I'm not sure how that "protects marriage" [ QUOTE ] What is the precise positive effect that the state has and that AC doesnt such that the effect force a collapse of an AC society but a not a statist one? [/ QUOTE ] Forcing indivduals to act in their best interest when collective action is best, but defecting individually is better then cooperating when someone else defects. [ QUOTE ] Im just saying the society has a cultural bias for male children when there is only one to choose from. The government's restriction on birth rates, a consequence of communist social policies, has set the stage for the ultimate aggression since there will be a variety greater population of men versus women. [/ QUOTE ] How do you expect me to respond to that? China looks like a time bomb anyways. But I really don't keep up with that kinda stuff. I don't have enough details on laws in china to give a judgement. But speculatively overpopulation might be one of those things you'd want a government to get involved with. How the intervention is done can have some deleterious consequences. A male bias might indeed be one of those. The male bias is probable a bad thing on many levels. Including I assume aborting female children to get to male children.
|
|
#66
11-11-2007, 05:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Have a found a reason why AC will fail, that ACists will agree with?
Even if your crazy assumptions were right, I don't know how you can expect an anarcist to agree with you. Ok so I agree that if we abandon the tax breaks people get for being married, monogamy will be abandoned (lol), I agree that this will lead to relatively many men not getting access to the gene pool, this will make them angry and violent. And I agree with your personal preference for the current state with monogamy as the norm rather than polygamy. Do you think I think I have the right to force my preference on women who obviously don't agree with all above opinions?
As a sidenote, I don't know how US law is, but I can tell you that in Norway there are very few financial advantages to being married. And some propose removing them altogether. I have never heard anyone counter such an idea by suggesting it would be the end of monogamy. It's a ridiculous sentiment.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
