Gyroscopic Investing

Gosso wrote:

Pointedstick wrote: At this point, I'm going to claim that this thread offers some great support for my earlier opinion about the state of our union.

+1 Haha!

Last night I watched A Man For All Seasons and the following clip reminded of the discussions on this forum:

http://youtu.be/d9rjGTOA2NA

"So, now you give the devil benefit of law."
"Yes, what would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?"
"Yes! I'd cut down every law in England to do that."
"Oh? And when the last law was down and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man's laws, not God's, and if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?" 

~ Robert Bolt?

Kshartle wrote: It's a great film. It was required in Catholic school that we watch it.

Of course Thomas Moore made his living (and ending) "executing" the King's laws. So the law didn't really work out for him.

Gosso wrote:

Kshartle wrote: It's a great film. It was required in Catholic school that we watch it.

Of course Thomas Moore made his living (and ending) "executing" the King's laws. So the law didn't really work out for him.

So what are you going to do once the law is removed and big business starts oppressing you? 

Simonjester wrote: i suspect"whatever exactly that might be" refers to the differences in your belief in a NAP eschaton and his in a christian one. or another way of saying "what ever form it may take"

Simonjester wrote:

Kshartle wrote:

Xan wrote:

What's your basis for saying that I don't know what that means?  I agree that you don't.

..

Your statment where you said "whatever exactly that might be" is the basis for me saying you don't know what that means.

i suspect"whatever exactly that might be" refers to the differences in your belief in a NAP eschaton and his in a christian one.  or another way of saying "what ever form it may take"

Kshartle wrote:I think it's easy to see where my confusion came from, the language in the sentence leaves significant room for interpetation.

Kshartle wrote:Regardless....how does being "pre-eschaton" prove that we agree the initiation of force agaisnt other people is necessary?

Xan wrote:

Kshartle wrote:I think it's easy to see where my confusion came from, the language in the sentence leaves significant room for interpetation.

Sorry about the unclear wording. No problem...it happens

Kshartle wrote:Regardless....how does being "pre-eschaton" prove that we agree the initiation of force agaisnt other people is necessary?

Did you ever read the other post, the one I just linked to?  It describes that pretty well, I think.  You yourself say that government is a symptom, a result, not the cause, of the problem, and that only once children are raised without being "hit" will force go away.  So...  Please go work on making that happen, instead of advocating for a utopia which you believe to be unachievable until that happens. I don't beleive in any utopia. I'm sorry for bouncing into the political discussions where people are debating how the president can or can't help us and pointing out that he can't for a significant reason. It's difficult for me to abstain from them because the notion of the president helping us seems completely laughable. I tried...but then Moda said he thought it was impossible for the president to do it and I had to agree.

Simonjester wrote:

Xan wrote:
Did you ever read the other post, the one I just linked to? It describes that pretty well, I think. You yourself say that government is a symptom, a result, not the cause, of the problem, and that only once children are raised without being "hit" will force go away. So... Please go work on making that happen, instead of advocating for a utopia which you believe to be unachievable until that happens.

immanentize the eschaton!! (bring it about here on earth)

(tongue in cheek) it is a phrase commonly used a pejorative reference to certain utopian projects, such as socialism, communism, and transhumanism.

TennPaGa wrote:

Xan wrote: Nice modding there, TennPaGa!

Thanks.

I'm not quite done...

moda0306 wrote:

TennPaGa wrote:

Xan wrote: Nice modding there, TennPaGa!

Thanks.

I'm not quite done...

Tenn,

You've already proven yourself the best mod here.  No offense to the men who made it all possible.  The splitting of the thread and the poll was a great way to do your job while lightening the mood.

Xan wrote:

l82start wrote: immanentize the eschaton!!   (bring it about here on earth)

(tongue in cheek) it is a phrase commonly used a pejorative reference to certain utopian projects, such as socialism, communism, and transhumanism. 

That is a fun phrase, isn't it?  I think it was coined by William F Buckley.

Kshartle wrote:I don't beleive in any utopia.

Kshartle wrote:

Gosso wrote:

Kshartle wrote: It's a great film. It was required in Catholic school that we watch it.

Of course Thomas Moore made his living (and ending) "executing" the King's laws. So the law didn't really work out for him.

So what are you going to do once the law is removed and big business starts oppressing you? 

How will they do that?

Xan wrote:

Kshartle wrote:I don't beleive in any utopia.

Please, man, please!  You're the most Utopian person I've ever come across, alive or dead.  I'm not sure why you'd deny it.  I don't think there's anything about Utopia that by definition means it's unattainable.  If you believe in a Utopia that you think is attainable (and you do), then admit it.

Simonjester wrote: the Nap is a "semi utopian" idea in that "if "everyone was enlightened enough to live up to it, the world wouldn't suffer the infliction of force by government, or other men.. unlike most utopian schemes it is one you cant force on others... without violating it.

Kshartle wrote:

moda0306 wrote:

TennPaGa wrote: Thanks.

I'm not quite done...

Tenn,

You've already proven yourself the best mod here.  No offense to the men who made it all possible.  The splitting of the thread and the poll was a great way to do your job while lightening the mood.

I thought modding was supposed to be a thankless job. 

Well moda....I'll give you credit for dissproving that theory at least, hah!

Gosso wrote:

Kshartle wrote:

Gosso wrote: So what are you going to do once the law is removed and big business starts oppressing you? 

How will they do that?

Can you seriously not imagine a dictator filling in the void left by the government?  That is a lot of power simply sitting on the table.  You build yourself a little army and you easily have control of the country (this happens all the time)...or at least a civil war with the winner writing history and making all the rules.

I really don't want to get into a huge debate, since I don't enjoy them.  I mainly wanted to add that video clip into the conversation.

Kshartle wrote:Scour my posts for the word utopia and you'll see I am constantly telling you guys that there will never be a utopia, no matter how many times you bring it up.

Xan wrote:

Kshartle wrote:Scour my posts for the word utopia and you'll see I am constantly telling you guys that there will never be a utopia, no matter how many times you bring it up.

You're certainly right that there won't be one.  All you've demonstrated, though, is that you don't like to apply the word to your own philosophy.  If the shoe fits, go ahead and wear it.

Kshartle wrote:At any rate.....I'm not interested in back tracking the discussion. I'm over the governemnt thing. It's not the cause of our problems....it's the symptom of them.....as I've said on about 100 or more occasions here.

Xan wrote:

Kshartle wrote:At any rate.....I'm not interested in back tracking the discussion. I'm over the governemnt thing. It's not the cause of our problems....it's the symptom of them.....as I've said on about 100 or more occasions here.

So PLEASE stop lecturing us about what government should or shouldn't do, and go start creating your ideal society someplace.

Kshartle wrote:What shoe is that?

Xan wrote:

Kshartle wrote:What shoe is that?

You're a Utopian.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/utopian:
Noun
utopian (plural utopians)
    Someone who supports or heralds the establishment of a utopia

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/utopia:
Noun
utopia (plural utopias)
    A world in which everything and everyone works in perfect harmony.

Pointedstick wrote:Compare and contrast with my idea of a private society; I think a lot of things would still be shit, and people would still be violent and greedy, but simply that the systemic properties of the society's institutions would tend to discourage these things to a greater extent that contemporary government societies. It's better (IMHO ), but hardly utopic.

Xan wrote: Agreed, PS.  As with all reasonable theories about organizing society, yours takes human nature and behavior into account.  I think many of us have read your ideas with great interest, and I'm personally impressed with your ability to listen to people poke holes your work, and you go back and try to adjust your theory to fit the facts.  Not everyone can do that.

moda0306 wrote:

Kshartle wrote:

moda0306 wrote: Tenn,

You've already proven yourself the best mod here.  No offense to the men who made it all possible.  The splitting of the thread and the poll was a great way to do your job while lightening the mood.

I thought modding was supposed to be a thankless job. 

Well moda....I'll give you credit for dissproving that theory at least, hah!

Ha.  Nice one. For real.