Rudd Government to censor internet (2 Viewers)

[Enteebee]

I don't think libertarianism provides that a democratically elected non-libertarian government is morally justifiable right? So your choices are either a) Accept democracy as a higher principle than liberty (i.e. Allow people to choose not liberty) b) Enforce 'liberty' and in doing so take away the liberty to choose not to live under your libertarian system or c) Come up with something else.

 

[*TRUE*]

*TRUE*
I get ur sig! Good song if i must say so

I love that line....its my 'heartsong'... corny but *TRUE*

 

[withoutaface]

I don't think libertarianism provides that a democratically elected non-libertarian government is morally justifiable right? So your choices are either a) Accept democracy as a higher principle than liberty (i.e. Allow people to choose not liberty) b) Enforce 'liberty' and in doing so take away the liberty to choose not to live under your libertarian system or c) Come up with something else.

History has shown that no system, free or otherwise, can stand without the people taking ownership of it. The key is to win the battle of ideas and bring about liberty that way...

EDIT: I.e. via democracy

 

[Enteebee]

History has shown that no system, free or otherwise, can stand without the people taking ownership of it. The key is to win the battle of ideas and bring about liberty that way...

EDIT: I.e. via democracy

If you achieve your libertarian society would you allow for elections which could then remove liberty?

 

[withoutaface]

If you achieve your libertarian society would you allow for elections which could then remove liberty?

Yes. As I said you can't enforce a system on people or they'll reject it.

This is especially true in an ideology that's not particularly predisposed to crushing dissent.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

Socialism is about introducing government regulation towards a greater ideal.

I disagree about regulation - at least in this context.

I'll also direct you to the part where socialism and authoritarian social policy invariably go hand in hand, because both ideologies are about the government having a greater degree of control over peoples lives.

This is not universally true, necessary, nor how I would invision a "perfect" socialist country.


tl;dr I associate the political and economic ideologies of communism and socialism with freedom (for the consumers, I don't care about greedy corporations and companies), which would not support this, because it is evil.

 

[withoutaface]

I disagree about regulation - at least in this context.



This is not universally true, necessary, nor how I would invision a "perfect" socialist country.


tl;dr I associate the political and economic ideologies of communism and socialism with freedom (for the consumers, I don't care about greedy corporations and companies), which would not support this, because it is evil.

You're then talking about a mixed market, not pure socialism.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

You're then talking about a mixed market, not pure socialism.

What I'm saying is that just because the government would own and run all telecon infrastructure, as well as set pricing, etc - there is still no logical reason or connection between socialistic ideology and filtering, which would cause the government to introduce such a filter.

I mean sure, it's possible, it just depends on whoever is in charge, or I would imagine if they seriously considered it, they would do a census of sorts to find out what people want. Notice how the Rudd government didn't do this, and just went ahead thinking their opinions represent the entire country, when this wasn't even a serious election issue.

Regardless, my point was, this is totally against my idea of ideal socialism, therefore, I dislike it, since it takes away freedoms from people, and this is always bad regardless.

 

[withoutaface]

What I'm saying is that just because the government would own and run all telecon infrastructure, as well as set pricing, etc - there is still no logical reason or connection between socialistic ideology and filtering, which would cause the government to introduce such a filter.

I mean sure, it's possible, it just depends on whoever is in charge, or I would imagine if they seriously considered it, they would do a census of sorts to find out what people want. Notice how the Rudd government didn't do this, and just went ahead thinking their opinions represent the entire country, when this wasn't even a serious election issue.

Regardless, my point was, this is totally against my idea of ideal socialism, therefore, I dislike it, since it takes away freedoms from people, and this is always bad regardless.

That would be a socialist move, in that it's the polar opposite of what a capitalist system would endorse.

 

[Enteebee]

Yes. As I said you can't enforce a system on people or they'll reject it.

This is especially true in an ideology that's not particularly predisposed to crushing dissent.

So you would not stop the rise of greater tyranny through lesser? Doesn't that lead to a net loss of liberty overall?
As for reject it, who cares? The majority of people reject our current government, or at least would have a preference for government different to that we have.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

That would be a socialist move, in that it's the polar opposite of what a capitalist system would endorse.

I'm not 100% sure what you are implying here. If it is, that a socialist country would impose such a filter because it's not what a capitalist country would do, well...just look at us

 

[withoutaface]

I'm not 100% sure what you are implying here. If it is, that a socialist country would impose such a filter because it's not what a capitalist country would do, well...just look at us

Australia is a mixed market.

We have a minimum wage, we have a competition regulator, we have taxes on some goods but not on others, many products are banned, etc.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

Australia is a mixed market.

We have a minimum wage, we have a competition regulator, we have taxes on some goods but not on others, many products are banned, etc.

Are you suggesting pure capitalism does not allow for these things? Just like pure democracy cannot involve decision making by anyone other than the entire population of a country, etc - same type of thing, or different?

 

[withoutaface]

Are you suggesting pure capitalism does not allow for these things? Just like pure democracy cannot involve decision making by anyone other than the entire population of a country, etc - same type of thing, or different?

Pure capitalism would not have any of these things, because otherwise it would not be a free market.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

Pure capitalism would not have any of these things, because otherwise it would not be a free market.

What exactly? Internet? Content filtering? Voting? I'd appreciate it if you went into higher detail about what you mean exactly.

 

[withoutaface]

In a free market you would have just that. A market where people are free to make voluntary exchanges without the government interfering.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

Right, I understand precisely what you mean now, but I disagree on the basis that exceptions can very easily be made based on popularism or simply what's best for the people. Simply because a socialist market system implies heavy government intervention, this does not create a universal truth. In China, I'm sure we can agree that in certain areas of the market, the government does not interveine, where by a typical socialist market system it would.

This is the type of thing I would like, where as much intervention and interdiction is made, while still leaving enough freedom for the people to be relatively happy. Sounds a bit crazy, but I believe it's possible.

 

[Enteebee]

I don't mind collective ownership necessarily tbh... it's more just... whether it's really what I'd accept as 'collective ownership'.

 

[jb_nc]

can a friend still download anal pissing gangbang w/ creampies porn?? this is important.

 

[prichardson]

how mind-numbingly stupid

When they ban your avatar I'm going to cry It makes my day so much easier.