What's Rickie Lambert upto these days?..........

[Seal]

2 hours ago, tomav84 said:

i'll be honest, this is the first time i've heard of such a concept, so fogive my ignorance. but how can you not consider yourself to have a government? surely the moment you pay a penny of tax (be it car, council, or buying a product/service) or the moment you use a service provided by the government (i.e. NHS) then that is you giving your consent?

This is a good question so no need for forgiveness for ignorance.

My personal approach is to withdraw from any links that I have or minimise them. I have never voted nor have I registered to. I have never been registered to a GP, although I was fortunate to have a father who was one. I have also been fortunate to not really suffer illness. I have used the NHS for sports injuries, although I didn't have this philosophy at the time. I would err towards using it but refer to my comments about tax, below. 

Tax is an interesting one. I personally get around this by considering myself to be a victim of tax theft, rather than a payer of tax. I.e by shifting my perception. I appreciate that this could be considered a lazy way out. But it works for my happiness and perhaps that of the taxman also. Things like VAT or council tax I guess their is a spurious argument that I pay by choice, but really it doesn't really feel like a choice. I am sure other people just pay tax, but then find they have a debt collector out to re-connect them to government. My way is cleaner

But also tax can be perceived to be a bit of a life ring in terms of navigating the services provided by the government. For instance I intend to take my state pension. I intend to be morally inline with my aforementioned philosophy. I would thus consider taking my state pension to be taking back the tax that I consider to be a victim of theft too. I guess this could also legitimise the use of services provided by the government also. 

I would also add that it is very tricky weeding out all these ways that consent could be garnered. So I do by no means consider myself to be properly disconnected. I consider it something to aspire to rather than something I have achieved. I think if I were audited on it, there would be a number of audit issues. 

The other thing to think about is what government is. It is fundamentally not something real, like a brick. It is a construct of human creation, mainly I would argue through ideas and thoughts. Ultimately it is mental construct rather than a physical one. So to not have a government I think is a mental based exercise, rather than one of physically doing any revolutions or anything.

[rodders0223]

The **** is this thread.

[Seal]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

The problem with this is it IMO confuses the personal (my beliefs and values, my 'consent', 'being true to their own sum of thoughts and experiences' and 'trying on different reality hats') with the political (the system of government we have in the country I live in). On the left, there are anarchists, but I think there's a clear distinction between the type of perspective shown in the paragraph above and anarchism. I'm not an anarchist and have many disagreements with their worldview but they do (at least the serious ones anyway) have a theory of the state and its powers, which is essential if you want to propose or create any form of alternative. By contrast, this personal rejection of 'the nation state or the nation state system' I associate more with right-wing politics but it's not a politics that can go anywhere because it doesn't involve coordination or a consistent theory of the state, and because it is less coherent it always ends up in grifters selling courses to suckers over the Internet. 

I get what you are saying and don't think it is incorrect. I do consider this fundamentally more of a moral position than a political ideology.

I would consider myself an anarchist, although appreciative that it is a spectrum (there is both right/left wing anarchism). I would consider anarchism not to be the absence of a state, but perhaps an absence of unjustified hierarchies. I do get that the position I stated above is associated with right wing politics (libertarian), however personally I tend to avoid right and left wing as I think it is not the best model to view politics through. I would say that I would give my consent to be governed to a government that I felt was good. Obviously I have ideas over what this would look like that differ from what there is. I think this government would need to justify its hierarchies.

I guess what I think is that I suspect a better political system would come if people took responsibility for their own lives (their own health, their own choices, their own betterment and their ability to make good choices for their relationships to other humans). I don't really see humans out there at the minute who think government works for them. And to be honest I think that the best answer to that lies not with expecting a government to be better (which perhaps it should be) but to work on being the best you can be for your self and for others, and seeing where this goes. I think a government that is built this way, rather than from an elite down stands a better chance of being justified than unjustified. I suspect it wouldn't look like the pictures of a government in the right or the left wing colouring books. 

 

[chrisp65]

1 hour ago, Seal said:

I get what you are saying and don't think it is incorrect. I do consider this fundamentally more of a moral position than a political ideology.

I would consider myself an anarchist, although appreciative that it is a spectrum (there is both right/left wing anarchism). I would consider anarchism not to be the absence of a state, but perhaps an absence of unjustified hierarchies. I do get that the position I stated above is associated with right wing politics (libertarian), however personally I tend to avoid right and left wing as I think it is not the best model to view politics through. I would say that I would give my consent to be governed to a government that I felt was good. Obviously I have ideas over what this would look like that differ from what there is. I think this government would need to justify its hierarchies.

I guess what I think is that I suspect a better political system would come if people took responsibility for their own lives (their own health, their own choices, their own betterment and their ability to make good choices for their relationships to other humans). I don't really see humans out there at the minute who think government works for them. And to be honest I think that the best answer to that lies not with expecting a government to be better (which perhaps it should be) but to work on being the best you can be for your self and for others, and seeing where this goes. I think a government that is built this way, rather than from an elite down stands a better chance of being justified than unjustified. I suspect it wouldn't look like the pictures of a government in the right or the left wing colouring books. 

 

So, on the subject of taking responsibility for our own lives, how would you suggest I take responsibility for the education and dental care of my children? Do I have to home educate them and google up dentistry hacks? Or am I ok to join some form of co-operative system whereby I can trade my skills for the skills of teachers and dentists?

 

[tomav84]

1 hour ago, Seal said:

I guess what I think is that I suspect a better political system would come if people took responsibility for their own lives (their own health, their own choices, their own betterment and their ability to make good choices for their relationships to other humans). I don't really see humans out there at the minute who think government works for them. And to be honest I think that the best answer to that lies not with expecting a government to be better (which perhaps it should be) but to work on being the best you can be for your self and for others, and seeing where this goes. I think a government that is built this way, rather than from an elite down stands a better chance of being justified than unjustified. I suspect it wouldn't look like the pictures of a government in the right or the left wing colouring books. 

 

this doesn't half look like a lawless society to me...you say lets see where this goes, well i can tell you exactly where it would go. the reason being that people have different ways of judging "good choices for their relationships to other humans"

i'm actually quite staggered by this concept, because i just don't see how someone feasibly could operate in this way. i despise this current government...i didn't vote for them (but i did vote) and i won't be voting for them in the next election, but i at least acknowledge that a shit government is better than none at all

can you elaborate a bit more on how things like healthcare and education would work in  your desired model?

[chrisp65]

I guess anyone that truly believes in the individual to a point where they want to live entirely by their own rules and by their own wits, well, I guess they move to Somalia and give it a go.

[Mark Albrighton]

[VillaJ100]

I wonder if by withdrawing from being governed you also give up everything related to the country, so you don't pay tax but can't use any amenities etc without paying. Want to visit a national park etc? That's a grand 

[Seal]

32 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

this doesn't half look like a lawless society to me...you say lets see where this goes, well i can tell you exactly where it would go. the reason being that people have different ways of judging "good choices for their relationships to other humans"

i'm actually quite staggered by this concept, because i just don't see how someone feasibly could operate in this way. i despise this current government...i didn't vote for them (but i did vote) and i won't be voting for them in the next election, but i at least acknowledge that a shit government is better than none at all

can you elaborate a bit more on how things like healthcare and education would work in  your desired model?

Ok, although I consider it is less about the model, but more how I act as a human being:

Education should have a simpler purpose. Firstly it should encourage a child to find what they love in life. Then it should teach them how to make a living from what they love.

I think that it should also include things like keeping yourself healthy, and perhaps how to grow your own food. I think that an honest education system should teach these things and I struggle to get behind an education model that doesn't do this. I think the need for a healthcare system can be greatly reduced by individuals being individually responsible for their own health.  I think that the healthcare model that we have is unjustified in many ways. But I appreciate that there would always be a need for some sort of system - and should be people over profit for a start. 

Like I said, I don't have a desired model, not have I argued for a rule less society, nor even rejected outright the concept of a government. I have no wish to tell anyone else how to live or what their beliefs should be. It is just me trying to live my life in the way I would like to see the world. As opposed to living how a group of people  I have never met, of dubious moral character, tells me is the best way to live. 

I also agree that taking this route requires responsibility. So I would suggest if you don't think it would work you take another approach. It certainly may not be for many. Maybe that it doesn't is indicative that the education system isn't working in the model we currently have? Maybe not. 

People do have different ways of judging good choices for their relationships to other humans. However things can still be judged on what harm these 'good choices' have. Currently we have a system where a great deal of harm is caused because governments make good choices for their relationships with humans? Wars exist. Poverty exists. etc.

"this doesn't half look like a lawless society to me...you say lets see where this goes, well i can tell you exactly where it would go" I think we have different opinions on the state of humanity. I think humans are ALL capable of being good, and I think the vast majority are good, I think that the state that society often looks is a reflection on the society itself. People measure themselves by what society says is good, but also society is made up of individuals. It is a bit chicken and egg, but I think the way forward is for individuals to assume a responsibility. I also think that if you look at society through the window of the media, it looks pretty lawless out there now as it is, just with a society based on selfishness to bring it to life. And I think that is due in a large part to the actions of government.

[Seal]

57 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I guess anyone that truly believes in the individual to a point where they want to live entirely by their own rules and by their own wits, well, I guess they move to Somalia and give it a go.

you don't need to move to Somalia! nation states are a figment of the collective consciousness, and the only nation that can truly exist is the imagination

[Davkaus]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

 Or am I ok to join some form of co-operative system whereby I can trade my skills for the skills of teachers and dentists?

 

This sounds like a fantastic idea, could we scale it up?

[Daveburnside]

There's only one thing worse than someone who believes every conspiracy theory, and that's someone who believes none. 

[tomav84]

52 minutes ago, Seal said:

Ok, although I consider it is less about the model, but more how I act as a human being:

Education should have a simpler purpose. Firstly it should encourage a child to find what they love in life. Then it should teach them how to make a living from what they love.

I think that it should also include things like keeping yourself healthy, and perhaps how to grow your own food. I think that an honest education system should teach these things and I struggle to get behind an education model that doesn't do this. I think the need for a healthcare system can be greatly reduced by individuals being individually responsible for their own health.  I think that the healthcare model that we have is unjustified in many ways. But I appreciate that there would always be a need for some sort of system - and should be people over profit for a start. 

Like I said, I don't have a desired model, not have I argued for a rule less society, nor even rejected outright the concept of a government. I have no wish to tell anyone else how to live or what their beliefs should be. It is just me trying to live my life in the way I would like to see the world. As opposed to living how a group of people  I have never met, of dubious moral character, tells me is the best way to live. 

I also agree that taking this route requires responsibility. So I would suggest if you don't think it would work you take another approach. It certainly may not be for many. Maybe that it doesn't is indicative that the education system isn't working in the model we currently have? Maybe not. 

People do have different ways of judging good choices for their relationships to other humans. However things can still be judged on what harm these 'good choices' have. Currently we have a system where a great deal of harm is caused because governments make good choices for their relationships with humans? Wars exist. Poverty exists. etc.

"this doesn't half look like a lawless society to me...you say lets see where this goes, well i can tell you exactly where it would go" I think we have different opinions on the state of humanity. I think humans are ALL capable of being good, and I think the vast majority are good, I think that the state that society often looks is a reflection on the society itself. People measure themselves by what society says is good, but also society is made up of individuals. It is a bit chicken and egg, but I think the way forward is for individuals to assume a responsibility. I also think that if you look at society through the window of the media, it looks pretty lawless out there now as it is, just with a society based on selfishness to bring it to life. And I think that is due in a large part to the actions of government.

it's an interesting concept and one i didn't really know people truely believed in until today. i'm curious about this point:

"It is just me trying to live my life in the way I would like to see the world. As opposed to living how a group of people  I have never met, of dubious moral character, tells me is the best way to live. "

you say you're not arguing for a lawless society but i can't read the above statement as anything but that? your view on the world could be that if someone wrongs you in some way then you have the right to kill them. your view on the world could be that people should have the right to have consentual relationships with a person of any age they desire. those are extremes and im not accusing you of having those views, but in the society you suggest, SOME can (and 100% will) have those views. which i'd say the majority of people would consider those types of actions as being wrong. so how do we stop this sort of thing happening based? what happens to these types of individuals?

so yes you're right...we do disagree on the state of humanity. whilst all humans are certainly capable of being good, there are some that simply do not want to be and will hurt others either for monitary gain, or just becuase they're arseholes and they enjoy it.

[chrisp65]

1 hour ago, Seal said:

you don't need to move to Somalia! nation states are a figment of the collective consciousness, and the only nation that can truly exist is the imagination

Nah, I think if I walked in to Tesco, naked, wearing just a grenade launcher, and took all their shampoo there would be real life consequences no matter what my views were on the Magna Carta or collective consciousness.

I really do think it would be easier to do that in Somalia. Not without consequences potentially, but more achievable.

[theboyangel]

I have experience of someone attempting to avoid prosecution by stating they were a yeoman of the land and citing the Magna Carta…

It didn’t last long… it’s an absolute fallacy that it has any value or an effective way of getting out of the shit. 

[tinker]

Soon be on the phone to the police if someone came around and took all your possessions and that's what would happen, the strongest would flourish at the expense of the weak. 

[rodders0223]

2 hours ago, Daveburnside said:

There's only one thing worse than someone who believes every conspiracy theory, and that's someone who believes none. 

No I'd say the one who believes every one is worse.

[villan-scott]

Ricky… are you ok?

[fruitvilla]

2 hours ago, Daveburnside said:

There's only one thing worse than someone who believes every conspiracy theory, and that's someone who believes none. 

Which conspiracy theories do you believe in? Or are you worse as well?

[Daveburnside]

21 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

Which conspiracy theories do you believe in? Or are you worse as well?

Don't ask me. JFK said it shortly after his assassination by the CIA.