Soulutions
Active member
Undoubtedly, if you've ever debated -- virtually or in person -- a statist, you'd be well aware of the rigid, stubborn, non-arguments their full of.
1:
Who will build the roads!
Answer = the same damn people. A society having a perceived "authority" has nothing to do with roads being built. Yes the "government" pays the contractors, but where does that money come from?? Individuals! In the form of taxes
2:
Haveing "government" is a necessity. Without it there would be constant bloodshed and chaos!
Answer = flip threw a damn history book. Nearly all of the most atrocious acts of humanity against humanity was played out not by people breaking the law, but by those obeying and Enforcing those laws. Individuals don't incite wars on the Continental ( world stage )scale. Governments do
this non-argument comes from the idea that humans are inherently evil, untrustworthy, and malicious. The statist solution is as follows -- we'll take a subset of those evil, untrustworthy, and malicious humans, and give them permission AND our resources to forcibly enforce their biased opinions on how society should be structured
3:
I'm the absence of government, violent street gangs would rise to power, creating a brand new government!
Answer = no, no it wouldn't. ( triple negative, yeah I see that ) by definition a street gangs could never be considered government. The fundamental difference being the perceived "right to rule." Let's use a gang rape for example, seems appropriate. Even if 100% of the gang agrees that "yes it's been a long day and we're all going to have sex with you(rapee)" I'm absolutely positive that the rapee in 100% of these cases Never views their demands as legitimate. That's the difference between gangs and government, the perceptual legitimacy.
Just a few of their mental bootlicking talking points. There are many more though
1:
Who will build the roads!
Answer = the same damn people. A society having a perceived "authority" has nothing to do with roads being built. Yes the "government" pays the contractors, but where does that money come from?? Individuals! In the form of taxes
2:
Haveing "government" is a necessity. Without it there would be constant bloodshed and chaos!
Answer = flip threw a damn history book. Nearly all of the most atrocious acts of humanity against humanity was played out not by people breaking the law, but by those obeying and Enforcing those laws. Individuals don't incite wars on the Continental ( world stage )scale. Governments do
this non-argument comes from the idea that humans are inherently evil, untrustworthy, and malicious. The statist solution is as follows -- we'll take a subset of those evil, untrustworthy, and malicious humans, and give them permission AND our resources to forcibly enforce their biased opinions on how society should be structured
3:
I'm the absence of government, violent street gangs would rise to power, creating a brand new government!
Answer = no, no it wouldn't. ( triple negative, yeah I see that ) by definition a street gangs could never be considered government. The fundamental difference being the perceived "right to rule." Let's use a gang rape for example, seems appropriate. Even if 100% of the gang agrees that "yes it's been a long day and we're all going to have sex with you(rapee)" I'm absolutely positive that the rapee in 100% of these cases Never views their demands as legitimate. That's the difference between gangs and government, the perceptual legitimacy.
Just a few of their mental bootlicking talking points. There are many more though
