It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Please Read This: You Can Make A Difference. The Only Law We Really Need.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb
It all comes down to responsibility, and in a society where everything is free, responsibility is no longer an option as it is in the current paradigm. But feel free to take a day off and go enjoy yourself. Everyone will have a job.

I think we can all agree it would be a nice idea and we all know it comes down to responsibility... BUT...
Not everyone is responsible, and where are your freedoms if you choose to sit on your butt and let everyone else be responsible?
What if I don't want a job? What if I want to freeload off you all my life?

... and to come back to the point on Courts, as I asked before, who creates the court? Who runs it? Who enforces the courts decisions? It's already the start of a slippery slope.




posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by juniperberry
So you're all willing to create and then give it all away for free?

Where's the incentive?

If everything and everyone was free, what's to stop everyone from heading to the beach everyday and ignoring the important things like gathering food? Or feeding your children? Or building safe buildings? Or doing life saving surgery?

People do things for money (or advantage). If there was no advantage half the people would stop doing anything..

Soo.. good luck with that..


Everybody should know that they have to do their part. Just knowing that if it is to be its up to you SHOULD be incentive enough. Knowing that if it weren't for you working, nothing would get done and everything would die.

Responsibility.


Your theory is severely flawed.

You cannot force people to be responsible and share and work for free. We live in a world with lots of irresponsibility. And according to your theory we should not force anyone to do anything. It is a free for all and a "what is yours is mine world and if you dont like it, I can do whatever I want to you and nothing will happen to me...mwhahahahah". Wont work. Never.

It will cause a world of stealing and murdering and every other crime against humanity without any consequences. It will cause a world of entire species elimination based on hunting, etc. It will cause utmost pollution that will kill us all quicker than it already may be killing us. It will cause utmost laziness and filth. It will cause absolutely no accountability for one's actions. The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.......

Do you see why laws are needed and actually make us all more free?

Laws are a must in order to have a civil society. Compensation for work is a must in order to live in a society that is not lazy and irresponsible.

Can you show us a society at anytime in the history of man that successfully succeeded with absolutely no laws, no compensation for work....and so on?





edit on June 22nd 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by juniperberry
So you're all willing to create and then give it all away for free?

Where's the incentive?

If everything and everyone was free, what's to stop everyone from heading to the beach everyday and ignoring the important things like gathering food? Or feeding your children? Or building safe buildings? Or doing life saving surgery?

People do things for money (or advantage). If there was no advantage half the people would stop doing anything..

Soo.. good luck with that..


Everybody should know that they have to do their part. Just knowing that if it is to be its up to you SHOULD be incentive enough. Knowing that if it weren't for you working, nothing would get done and everything would die.

Responsibility.


Your theory is severely flawed.
You cannot force people to be responsible. We live in a world with lots of irresponsibility. And according to your theory we should not force anyone to do anything. It is a free for all and a "what is yours is mine world and if you dont like it, I can do whatever I want to you and nothing will happen to me...mwhahahahah". Wont work. Never.

Laws are a must in order to have a civil society. Compensation for work is a must in order to live in a society that is not lazy and irresponsible.
edit on June 22nd 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)


Responsibility would not be forced on you. The fact that responsibility would not be an option occurs when the paradigm shifts into freedom, and everyone willingly accepts their new sense of responsibility.

You might think you can just lay off and be lazy your whole life, and maybe you could. But in the new paradigm when everyone you know is unpleased with your lack of creative endeavours, you would feel an immense pressure to conform to the norm. If no one participated then everyone would realize quickly that they need to do something. If only a few deviants rebel, well society still goes on, and the deviant is living with the pressure and discomfort from the disapproval of his peers.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Bit

Originally posted by smithjustinb
It all comes down to responsibility, and in a society where everything is free, responsibility is no longer an option as it is in the current paradigm. But feel free to take a day off and go enjoy yourself. Everyone will have a job.

I think we can all agree it would be a nice idea and we all know it comes down to responsibility... BUT...
Not everyone is responsible, and where are your freedoms if you choose to sit on your butt and let everyone else be responsible?
What if I don't want a job? What if I want to freeload off you all my life?

... and to come back to the point on Courts, as I asked before, who creates the court? Who runs it? Who enforces the courts decisions? It's already the start of a slippery slope.


In the new paradigm, responsibility is forced on you by the paradigm itself. You could freeload, but no one would approve of it, although no one would do anything to prevent you from freeloading, you would be quietly shunned in the minds of your peers. No one wants to be isolated and everyone conforms to norms of society because they want to feel accepted.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Yes, people would start doing things for themselves in order to progress thru life. Then you would have people who want to steal from that successful person because they are too lazy and well there is no consequence to taking from another.

Unfortunately, human nature is selfish and to look out for oneself and oneself only.
While there are people out there who are not selfish and truly sacrfice theirselves for others....at the end of the day, that is not the norm and will never be the norm. That is not how human nature works


While your utopia sounds all wram and fuzzy it is so far from reality and would never work.
edit on June 22nd 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by juniperberry
So you're all willing to create and then give it all away for free?

Where's the incentive?

If everything and everyone was free, what's to stop everyone from heading to the beach everyday and ignoring the important things like gathering food? Or feeding your children? Or building safe buildings? Or doing life saving surgery?

People do things for money (or advantage). If there was no advantage half the people would stop doing anything..

Soo.. good luck with that..


Everybody should know that they have to do their part. Just knowing that if it is to be its up to you SHOULD be incentive enough. Knowing that if it weren't for you working, nothing would get done and everything would die.

Responsibility.


Your theory is severely flawed.

It will cause a world of stealing and murdering and every other crime against humanity without any consequences. It will cause a world of entire species elimination based on hunting, etc. It will cause utmost pollution that will kill us all quicker than it already may be killing us. It will cause utmost laziness and filth. It will cause absolutely no accountability for one's actions. The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.......

Do you see why laws are needed and actually make us all more free?

Laws are a must in order to have a civil society. Compensation for work is a must in order to live in a society that is not lazy and irresponsible.

Can you show us a society at anytime in the history of man that successfully succeeded with absolutely no laws, no compensation for work....and so on?





edit on June 22nd 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)


I cannot show you a society in the history of man that has successfully succeeded with no laws, but the society I'm speaking of does have a law. The law is freedom. No society has ever been like this, so no I can't show you an example.

Murder limits freedom.
Pollution limits lifespan which limits freedom.

The only law you need is freedom. Everything else falls in place as it should.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by Mister_Bit

Originally posted by smithjustinb
It all comes down to responsibility, and in a society where everything is free, responsibility is no longer an option as it is in the current paradigm. But feel free to take a day off and go enjoy yourself. Everyone will have a job.

I think we can all agree it would be a nice idea and we all know it comes down to responsibility... BUT...
Not everyone is responsible, and where are your freedoms if you choose to sit on your butt and let everyone else be responsible?
What if I don't want a job? What if I want to freeload off you all my life?

... and to come back to the point on Courts, as I asked before, who creates the court? Who runs it? Who enforces the courts decisions? It's already the start of a slippery slope.


In the new paradigm, responsibility is forced on you by the paradigm itself. You could freeload, but no one would approve of it, although no one would do anything to prevent you from freeloading, you would be quietly shunned in the minds of your peers. No one wants to be isolated and everyone conforms to norms of society because they want to feel accepted.

I understand your ideas believe me but people steal, kill, rape and do anti-social things now and could care less what people think, say or do and that is under current laws, how bad do you think it would be with no laws?

I'm going to hate myself and probably be hated by a few people here for saying this but not everyone is as "intelligent" as you or I to see the ideal and work for it.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb

I cannot show you a society in the history of man that has successfully succeeded with no laws, but the society I'm speaking of does have a law. The law is freedom. No society has ever been like this, so no I can't show you an example.

Murder limits freedom.
Pollution limits lifespan which limits freedom.

The only law you need is freedom. Everything else falls in place as it should.


There is no logic in your theory. None.
Yes, murder limits freedom and so does pollution.
So what is your plan to eliminate those while having no laws?

Because if I have to live in fear of someone stealing my stuff because it is a free for all society or murdering me over my cow that produces milk.............that is not freedom.

If I have to work my arse off in order to produce something for everyone else without compensation....that is not freedom....that is slavery.

Im curious...do you live this life now? Do you share everything you have and expect nothing in return? Do you leave keys in your car for anyone to take? What if they dont return it then what? *shrug* and say "oh well". Do you leave your doors open and allow anyone to enter and use your things and even take them if they want?

What happens when species start disappearing due to mass killing off? What then? *shrug* and say "oh well".

Do you not see that accountability and laws to force people to allow others to live in freedom are necessary?

You have an idea....but what is your plan? What is your plan for dealing with irresponsible people? Dealing with murderers, rapists, thieves?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Yes, people would start doing things for themselves in order to progress thru life. Then you would have people who want to steal from that successful person because they are too lazy and well there is no consequence to taking from another.

Unfortunately, human nature is selfish and to look out for oneself and oneself only.
While there are people out there who are not selfish and truly sacrfice theirselves for others....at the end of the day, that is not the norm and will never be the norm. That is not how human nature works


While your utopia sounds all wram and fuzzy it is so far from reality and would never work.
edit on June 22nd 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)


Once the paradigm is initiated, it can go two ways.

Now you know that some things just can't be accomplished by one person and takes a group to accomplish them, so you would have to make a choice in which way you want to go. And it is still your choice.

You very well could serve your self. You could grow your own food and you would survive and that's fine, but nothing really marvelous would be accomplished, however you would be satisfied with the way you survived.

Or you could serve others. Serve others in serving others. Your tasks would be efficient and there would be much more to enjoy. You would ceaselessly revel in the joy of what you and your peers have created.

All the while, the person who is serving his/her self is obeying the law of freedom and the person who is serving others is obeying the law of freedom and both are allowed to continue on as normal.

In the new paradigm, words like successful will only apply to the group as a whole, and words like subservient will cease to exist. Hierarchies crumble. The concept of theft would not be the same as it is today. Everything would be free, and without material things being a sign of higher status, no one would take more than they need. There would be no hierarchy to place yourself in the idea of higher status thus greed would be naturally irrational. Greed seems more like a capitalist mindset anyway.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


What is your plan in this utopia to deal with murderers, rapists, thieves and so on?

What is your plan to stop pollution, species elimination and all the other things that destroy Earth and human kind?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
The biggest flaw with this plan is that it relies on people not being people. If we were all robots then this would be a great idea and I'd support it, however we're not robots. We're human beings who are not going to work hours every day for the benefit of someone else, that's just not what people are like. Hell, I'm sure that you don't work for free right now, and I'm sure you don't give away all your stuff to whoever wants it, I'm sure you wouldn't let a homeless person take your car or your house because you're freaking Human!

Until you start practicing what you preach I'm going to consider you hypocritical and naive.


Edit: What you are proposing here is essentially this,



edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by smithjustinb

I cannot show you a society in the history of man that has successfully succeeded with no laws, but the society I'm speaking of does have a law. The law is freedom. No society has ever been like this, so no I can't show you an example.

Murder limits freedom.
Pollution limits lifespan which limits freedom.

The only law you need is freedom. Everything else falls in place as it should.


There is no logic in your theory. None.
Yes, murder limits freedom and so does pollution.
So what is your plan to eliminate those while having no laws?

Because if I have to live in fear of someone stealing my stuff because it is a free for all society or murdering me over my cow that produces milk.............that is not freedom.

If I have to work my arse off in order to produce something for everyone else without compensation....that is not freedom....that is slavery.

Im curious...do you live this life now? Do you share everything you have and expect nothing in return? Do you leave keys in your car for anyone to take? What if they dont return it then what? *shrug* and say "oh well". Do you leave your doors open and allow anyone to enter and use your things and even take them if they want?

What happens when species start disappearing due to mass killing off? What then? *shrug* and say "oh well".

Do you not see that accountability and laws to force people to allow others to live in freedom are necessary?

You have an idea....but what is your plan? What is your plan for dealing with irresponsible people? Dealing with murderers, rapists, thieves?


There isn't no law, there is the law of freedom. It is one law. I do not live the life I speak of because I am subject to and a victim of the current paradigm where these disharmonies do exist. Only a new paradigm such as the one that lives by the law of freedom can eliminate disharmonious ideas such as greed, murder, and theft and perhaps the paradigm could be so effective that there would not even need to be a justice system. Probably not at first, but we have to think long term here. And maybe not. Maybe you would be forced to do some of the dirty and dangerous work that no one else would if it happened that you broke the law of freedom.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Only a new paradigm such as the one that lives by the law of freedom can eliminate disharmonious ideas such as greed, murder, and theft and perhaps the paradigm could be so effective that there would not even need to be a justice system.





Yeah, eliminate greed, murder, and theft. That worked out.
edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)


Edit:

I'd recommend that you read this.
www.amazon.com...


edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nosred
The biggest flaw with this plan is that it relies on people not being people. If we were all robots then this would be a great idea and I'd support it, however we're not robots. We're human beings who are not going to work hours every day for the benefit of someone else, that's just not what people are like. Hell, I'm sure that you don't work for free right now, and I'm sure you don't give away all your stuff to whoever wants it, I'm sure you wouldn't let a homeless person take your car or your house because you're freaking Human!

Until you start practicing what you preach I'm going to consider you hypocritical and naive.


Edit: What you are proposing here is essentially this,



edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)


I am on the fence of two paradigms. While I am subject to the current monetary system and the oppressive nature of people, I do manage to find time to partake in random acts of kindness and selfless service, but I feel my potential is limited because there aren't many people like me. I do the best I can.

You think you are human and you are but you are also victim to the group consensus, and the group is controlled by people who are greedy so naturally subservients will follow suit. More than a single human, you are part of an unseen group paradigm that influences your behaviors in ways that you would normally never consider.

The law of freedom is the beginning of a new paradigm. We will, as humans, follow suit. We always do.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
In a small community that shares all the same values this idea would work, on a larger countrywide or worldwide scale this is impossible sadly.

Let me just make clear where I am coming from, I am in 100% agreement with your ideals but sadly I think it is a little naive to presume all the criminals out there will roll over and go all "fluffy" to help society because their peers would make them feel bad.

I've discused this idea of an ideal society in other threads and come to the conclusion that being 100% free is impossible, guidelines would always be needed and then again I ask, who writes the guidelines, who enforces them etc etc...



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb
The law of freedom is the beginning of a new paradigm. We will, as humans, follow suit. We always do.


We did follow suit, in 1917.

Last time I checked this ended with people climbing walls topped with barbed wire under machine gun fire just so they wouldn't have to starve to death.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nosred

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Only a new paradigm such as the one that lives by the law of freedom can eliminate disharmonious ideas such as greed, murder, and theft and perhaps the paradigm could be so effective that there would not even need to be a justice system.





Yeah, eliminate greed, murder, and theft. That worked out.
edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)


Edit:

I'd recommend that you read this.
www.amazon.com...


edit on 22-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)


What is that the symbol of the soviet union? I'm not sure.

The problem with socialist and communist ideal societies was that they forgot about freedom. They had this immaculate plan that was well-thought out and well intended, but failed to shift the group paradigm because the freedom of the people was limited and disregarded.

I am not proposing a new system or even an old one, I am proposing the law of freedom.

lol to that other pic with the guy in the helmet.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Bit
In a small community that shares all the same values this idea would work, on a larger countrywide or worldwide scale this is impossible sadly.

Let me just make clear where I am coming from, I am in 100% agreement with your ideals but sadly I think it is a little naive to presume all the criminals out there will roll over and go all "fluffy" to help society because their peers would make them feel bad.

I've discused this idea of an ideal society in other threads and come to the conclusion that being 100% free is impossible, guidelines would always be needed and then again I ask, who writes the guidelines, who enforces them etc etc...


The fact is, you are already 100% free. There are social norms that come from false systems that keep you from commiting certain "crimes", but if it is your will, you could carry it out.

The only guideline is the law of freedom. Logic determines what is an act that limits freedom. Although you are being punished by doing dangerous or unsanitary manual labor as a consequence of your actions, you can keep your happiness and sanity unlike in the current prison system, just not your freedom. So in this case, it is an eye for an eye.
edit on 22-6-2011 by smithjustinb because: aqweqwerh



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb

What is that the symbol of the soviet union? I'm not sure.


I'm going to guess you're still in high school, that might explain a lot.


The problem with socialist and communist ideal societies was that they forgot about freedom. They had this immaculate plan that was well-thought out and well intended, but failed to shift the group paradigm because the freedom of the people was limited and disregarded.


Here I'll quote Ayn Rand, someone who witnessed the revolution in Russia first hand,

"When, at the age of twelve, at the time of the Russian revolution, I first heard the Communist principle that Man must exist for the sake of the State, I perceived that this was the essential issue, that this principle was evil, and that it could lead to nothing but evil, regardless of any methods, details, decrees, policies, promises and pious platitudes. This was the reason for my opposition to Communism then—and it is my reason now. I am still a little astonished, at times, that too many adult Americans do not understand the nature of the fight against Communism as clearly as I understood it at the age of twelve: they continue to believe that only Communist methods are evil, while Communist ideals are noble. All the victories of Communism since the year 1917 are due to that particular belief among the men who are still free."


I am not proposing a new system or even an old one, I am proposing the law of freedom.


You are proposing a form of unregulated anarcho-communism.


lol to that other pic with the guy in the helmet.


Again, I'm assuming you're young here. That's the only thing keeping me from calling you an idiot.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nosred

Originally posted by smithjustinb

What is that the symbol of the soviet union? I'm not sure.


I'm going to guess you're still in high school, that might explain a lot.


The problem with socialist and communist ideal societies was that they forgot about freedom. They had this immaculate plan that was well-thought out and well intended, but failed to shift the group paradigm because the freedom of the people was limited and disregarded.


Here I'll quote Ayn Rand, someone who witnessed the revolution in Russia first hand,

"When, at the age of twelve, at the time of the Russian revolution, I first heard the Communist principle that Man must exist for the sake of the State, I perceived that this was the essential issue, that this principle was evil, and that it could lead to nothing but evil, regardless of any methods, details, decrees, policies, promises and pious platitudes. This was the reason for my opposition to Communism then—and it is my reason now. I am still a little astonished, at times, that too many adult Americans do not understand the nature of the fight against Communism as clearly as I understood it at the age of twelve: they continue to believe that only Communist methods are evil, while Communist ideals are noble. All the victories of Communism since the year 1917 are due to that particular belief among the men who are still free."


I am not proposing a new system or even an old one, I am proposing the law of freedom.


You are proposing a form of unregulated anarcho-communism.


lol to that other pic with the guy in the helmet.


Again, I'm assuming you're young here. That's the only thing keeping me from calling you an idiot.


I am somewhat young. I am 21 in my second year of college. Please don't resort to disrespect, that would totally mess up any kind of real productive discussion we are currently having.

As I said, this is not communism or socialism.

Even democracy is based on the ideal of freedom, they just managed to screw it up along the way by creating meaningless laws and such.

Communism is service to the state when in reality is service to a small group of people that call themselves "the state". Thus you have a hierarchy of master and slaves. Ideals in such a hierarchial paradigm are useless because they are hypocritical. The law of freedom eliminates the hierarchies.

Seriously think about what I'm saying here and what you're arguing against.

How can the system suppress freedom when the system is freedom?

edit on 22-6-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join