Ethics: We lack it.

Let me start off by saying this is something that I personally feel very strongly about, and I really want get get a broader sense as to what others feel about this issue too, so that is why I would like to start a thread regarding a very important topic: Ethics on a micro and macro scale.

It doesn't take much longer than five seconds (depending on your Internet speed) to see that once you've arrived at ATS, there is a strong sense of "anti-government" and "anti-governing" (yes, the two are very different) attitude that goes on. But of course this is to be expected and even justified. After all, this is a conspiracy website and this is there as an alternate news source as the MSM fails to do it's job properly. I for one can not blame the large amounts of talk regarding negative connotation about the Government (mostly American) and will admit that the just of it has logical reasoning behind hit. What disturbs me however, is not only the hatred for "The Government" but also an extreme dislike of governing in general. People want to be free, people believe that overarching constraints will only hurt them. But like a person scarred by a church, they may forever have a negative impression on religion. In the same way, a Government abusing it's power excessively in a sick way would be enough to demoralize those who realize it enough to dislike the thought of overarching rule. But this creates a large problem that must be addressed because if not, people will see it as a solution (and I assure you, despite the majority's thoughts, it won't work): Libertarianism

Now isn't this just going to set off a few fuses on ATS? Such a left-leaning ideology seems to be the favourable choice among anti-government individuals.

What is right with Libertarianism? In truth, it can be a very good thing in some aspects. It provides justified rights for individuals, allows each person to "own" themselves, and if enforced correctly can ensure minimalistic government intervention. But because of human nature, it will never work.

Within this attitude comes the part where "each for themselves" and is made evident on ATS. Just going through a few threads, many people want to abolish the majority of the government, get rid of taxes, (and thus infrastructure) and want a minarchist. Why? Because Libertarianism promotes Pre-conventional Ethics.

Source

We see from this definition that pre-conventional ethics are based on rewards and punishment. It is the lowest form of ethics, and in Business school, it is known as just conducting business in a "legal manor" or in more blunt terms, maximizing profit without breaking the law (ex. Doing labour in China). Now, how does this even relate to Libertarianism you may ask? In Libertarianism, it is all about the individual. How can you deny that? It's all about what is best for each person and their immediate needs. Most people on ATS would argue and say that they would extend their "bubble" of "caring" in a Libertarian, minimalistic or anarchist society to their "loved" ones, but in essence, this is not good enough.

The Individualist attitude is not different than the people you love to hate: Large corporate CEO's, TPTB, Bankers, people on Wall Street, Rockefeller, you name it. They play the game where it's all about them, all about feeding their own desires despite what is best for the rest of the entire population. Libertarianism is no different. It's about you and your needs and wants. It's about making sure there is little governing authority to tell you what is best because you know better, right?

Put simply; if you have a PHD in Astro-Physics, and that's what you specialize in, but you don't know much else, are you going to try and build your own house when you lack experience? Vice versa, is the construction worker going to try and solve a complex mathematical physics problem? Of course not! (Although there are isolated cases). This may seem irrelevant, but you must understand: People specialize, and some know better than you do! Does that mean they must assert their advice at gun point? No! But it would be smart to heed someones advice where they specialize in the same way they heed yours when you are better at something than they are. It's called "Absolute Advantage" in business school. (Reading my Administrative Theory textbook inspired me to take a break from studying to write this).

But wait, there's more! It all ties in. When you are there to serve yourself and wish for nothing administrative to be above you (whether it be "God", government or boss) then you are acting with little ethics and lack of logic. We are not here to please ourselves, but to work together. In a Libertarian society, people aim to please themselves because they believe they are individuals, and everyone knows what's best for themselves. No one could work together because we'd all think we know better than the other person. It's moronic. When you refuse to take someone else's advice, including that of (non-corrupt) governing bodies, you fail to benefit society as a whole. This is how parts of the government have become corrupt themselves is self-orientated goals. It is sick, but people don't realize it. Taxes benefit an entire state when spent wisely, and keep society civilized and gives all an equal opportunity (in theory).

Individualism must die if we want to work together, and if we want to defeat our current societies objectives. Individualism is the spirit of those that we rant about and generate conspiracies about, and it's the same attitude that will overtake you if you believe that only you are good enough to take advice from.