|
|
|
|
#1
10-31-2006, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm not entirely sure why, but AC'er often claim that there is nonagression in AC land. But what's to stop one person from hiring the strongest army and enslaving the rest of the people? [/ QUOTE ] The army of everyone else who collectively have a lot more money than he does. [/ QUOTE ] Reading your post in the other thread was interesting and has bearing on this topic as well. But let's just say--while we're always speaking in hypotheticals--someone amasses 51% of the known wealth. What stops him now? [/ QUOTE ] A death star points its sights at Earth. What stops them from detroying us? 
|
|
#2
10-31-2006, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
LOL, what would happen under statism if someone amasses 51% of the known wealth?
|
|
#3
10-31-2006, 09:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
LOL, what would happen under statism if someone amasses 51% of the known wealth? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not saying it's a good thing no matter what. I just think it'd be easier to amass that much wealth under AC.
|
|
#4
10-31-2006, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] LOL, what would happen under statism if someone amasses 51% of the known wealth? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not saying it's a good thing no matter what. I just think it'd be easier to amass that much wealth under AC. [/ QUOTE ] 51% of the wealth on earth? Are you freaking kidding me? The Gross World Product is around 60 trillion dollars. Bill Gates is worth, what 60 billion? 1/10 of 1%!!! You think someone will be able to be becomes 500x as rich? Also, as I pointed out earlier, offense is tougher than defense. 51% of the resources doesn't guarantee victory in war. (See: UK v. US, 1776, e.g.). I will note that during the Cold War, two nations had well over half of the world's military resources and came to the brink of nuclear annihilation on several occasions. Ah, statism!
|
|
#5
10-31-2006, 09:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] LOL, what would happen under statism if someone amasses 51% of the known wealth? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not saying it's a good thing no matter what. I just think it'd be easier to amass that much wealth under AC. [/ QUOTE ] You are wrong. Very wrong.
|
|
#6
11-01-2006, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] LOL, what would happen under statism if someone amasses 51% of the known wealth? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not saying it's a good thing no matter what. I just think it'd be easier to amass that much wealth under AC. [/ QUOTE ] No, it would be much, much harder. You wouldn't have the government protecting you.
|
|
#7
10-31-2006, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm not entirely sure why, but AC'er often claim that there is nonagression in AC land. But what's to stop one person from hiring the strongest army and enslaving the rest of the people? [/ QUOTE ] The army of everyone else who collectively have a lot more money than he does. [/ QUOTE ] Reading your post in the other thread was interesting and has bearing on this topic as well. But let's just say--while we're always speaking in hypotheticals--someone amasses 51% of the known wealth. What stops him now? [/ QUOTE ] Well I'd say that everyone is pretty [penetrated] in that case. I see that as a pathologically unlikely condition though. Frankly, any society where someone has 51%+ of the wealth is totally doomed. The only real world example I can think of is Kim Jong Il.
|
|
#8
10-31-2006, 09:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
In other words, people might volunteer(!!!) for your army. [/ QUOTE ] ZOMG! People might volunteer for an army of a few hundred or a thousand, as opposed to the current situation, where they volunteer for armies numbering in the millions. It's like refusing to disarm a couple of gunfighters because you're afraid they'll then whip out their butter knives and use those to fight.
|
|
#10
10-31-2006, 09:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Tyranny in AC land
[ QUOTE ]
So the basic AC answer is: we're [censored] if someone does it, and nothing is stoping that person. Correct? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, but the operative word is "if." You're assuming a very, very big if. I mean, what happens if the president, congress and supreme court get together one day and decide to order the US military to start bombing all the US citizens? What's stopping them? EDIT: I'll throw in a poker example. What happens if you start running bad for the next three years? No strategy can guarantee a win. What's stopping you from going broke?
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
