On 01/12/2015 12:22 PM, Juan wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 10:07:05 -0700 > Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> https://stallman.org/articles/why-we-need-a-state.html >> >> Stallman opines therein: >> >> | Above all, we need a state in order to have democracy, which >> | is the system by which the many non-rich [aka beta, weak, >> | clueless, stupid, etc] join together to overcome the power >> | of the rich [aka alpha, powerful, skilled, smart, etc] and >> | thus deny them control over society. >> >> I agree, but only provisionally, and only if the alphas don't control >> the state. However, alphas typically do end up controlling the state, >> and that's the fatal defect. > > Yep. > > You quoted and refuted (a part of) Stallman's more general > theory. > > What first caught my attention though was that somebody who's > allegedly concerned with freedom, is an advocate of, among other > things, public education and 'national' 'defense'. > > Also, all the rest of 'free' socialist programs he favors > require high levels of taxation. But of course, robbery is > freedom.
Right, all of that stuff ought to be funded by voluntary contributions, either from self-interest or compassion and generosity. Robbery is unprovoked aggression. >> What's needed long term is conversion of >> betas into gammas. With enough gammas, the state will arguably wither >> away. But I'll be dead long before then, so I focus on the process. >> >>> When I first read it I missed this line >>> >>> "Copyright (c) 2013 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and >>> redistribution of this entire page are permitted provided >>> this notice is preserved. " >>> >>> LMAO! unintentional self-parody at its best. >> >> No, he's just saying that he'll track you down and kick your ass if >> you fuck with his shit. There's no state required for that ;) > > > Well, the copyright notice looks like a US government copyright > notice. But that's not what I was getting at anyway. Yes, you're right. He could have used non-state terminology. > The thing is, as Rysiek pointed out, Stallman's position > doesn't seem fully consistent. > > And Mirimir, you've just violated Stallman's copyright! It says > "verbatim copying" but you added a comment of your own inside > Stallman's text. Brace yourself! Not at all. Short quotes in reviews etc are fair use.
