Topic: How spread is drug usage in weightlifting?

[TheRedReaper]

I used to frequent this forum. I've been away for a long time, and decided to give it a quick look to see what I've missed. I came on this thread to read a discussion on how widespread doping is in weightlifting (because I've never read such an original thread  ). What I found instead was a fascinating conversation on anarcho-capitalism vs communism vs fascism etc. As interesting as it was, it's not what I came to read. I've noticed that many of the threads go off topic and often political...maybe that's why there is less traffic here now? I'm not saying that these conversations shouldn't happen, it's just hard to find the weightlifting talk in between all the politics sometimes...

If you have a question, start a new thread. This is my thread, you don't have to like it.
I don't like forums where mods keep deleting stuff...

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

There is only so much economics I can feed you here, especially if we don't take things issue by issue. The basic moral point is clear. Slavery, including tax slavery, is immoral. Certainly society would be vastly wealthier with a fully private system since government bureaucracy wouldn't be wasting money in non-production, which is all they do. Essentially you are asking, "Will the slaves be better off as free people?" But taxation is only one aspect of the state's violence. It is essentially a terrorist protection racket claiming, "I am here to protect you.  But if you don't like my protection, you can't fire me and if you try to escape my protection I will kill you. Also, you will pay me whatever I say for this protection." Essentially, government is a monopoly and monopolies merely increase costs. If you want to learn some economics, read Man, Economy and State [first] by Murray Rothbard:

Description: https://mises.org/store/Man-Economy-and-State-with-Power-and-Market-The-Scholars-Edition-Digital-Book-P10535C94.aspx
Free pdf: http://mises.org/books/mespm.pdf
Free epub: http://mises.org/books/ManEconState.epub

[TheRedReaper]

Yeah, well, that's what it's like in the land of the free, where you have only 2 political parties moulded out of stone. In other countries, you could form your own political party and bring your arguement to the people through the actual system. Like Hitler did, LOL - everyone knew a vote for Hitler was a vote to end democracy entirely. He didn't like democracy much either, but he used democracy as his initial weapon to fight it. But you don't have that choice since you can't form a party and the republicans and democrats would never hire you, but still expect you to vote for them. Hahaha
 
Well I agree with your assessment of what government is, though I do not know if getting rid of government in these modern times will actually help people. And society being "more wealthy" is not a measure of the quality of life for the common people, not with such large gaps between rich and poor.
 
So this is where I go full circle and just pointlessly wish that all modern technology would just piss off and not exist, so I could ride around on a charger all Gregor Clegane style, clad in steel head to foot with a lance in one arm and a barrel of beer in the other and chose how the realm is governed by cutting off the heads of people I don't like... as i said at the start of the thread!

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

If you have a question, start a new thread. This is my thread, you don't have to like it. I don't like forums where mods keep deleting stuff...

Well said. He is right though that western countries in general are sick and tired of free speech. They aren't interested. They want to be told what to think on the propaganda box and told what to say and they want people put in jail that don't obey. So of course they have little tolerance for it on a forum. The U.S. government is even murdering American children for their father's speech now via drone, with no trial or due process at all, for example.

Well I agree with your assessment of what government is, though I do not know if getting rid of government in these modern times will actually help people. And society being "more wealthy" is not a measure of the quality of life for the common people, not with such large gaps between rich and poor.

It is interesting that the people who rail about "greed" all the time care more about money than freedom, though you are a rare ancom, if I can use that label accurately, to admit it. I can't prove to you in this thread I am sure that a free society would be wealthier and would have a more just and even distribution of wealth. We would have to go through each economic issue, every type of economic violence done by the government one by one, for example tariffs, inflation, price controls, exchange controls, capital controls, human movement controls, etc, and even then we would likely have to go back and forth for a long time before possibly making much progress on any one of those issues. If you read that book link I posted, it covers them all and shows they all fail to achieve their objectives and must fail to achieve them due to economic law. In fact, they almost always achieve the direct opposite of their intended result. In philosophical terms, this is simply the inevitable result of violence begetting more violence. Violence cannot solve complex social problems. But I thought we went over taxation in general, which funds all the other violence, and we made some progress toward agreeing that taxation is merely a tool of the rich to keep the poor down. Certainly as tax rates have increased in America, there have been far less people rising to the top, especially without handouts from the state. There could be no Henry Ford now, for instance. He wouldn't be allowed to pour his profits back in to the business as he did, because the state would rather spend his money. So those on top stay on top and those on the bottom continue to be given back scraps of their own money, after the elites use it for their own purposes.

Finally I will tell you that values are subjective. Freedom is more valuable than wealth to me, for instance. I would be happier, or wealthier if you count psychic income, being freer and poorer. This is exactly why collectivism is inhuman and violence incarnate. We are individuals. You cannot aggregate individuals into groups without violence. People are not and don't want to be equal, except under the law. And equality under the law requires anarchy by definition since the rulers are allowed to rob but not the "citizens", the rulers are allowed to order other people around at gunpoint but not the people, etc to infinity. Government is the negation of law since its existence is dependent on constant theft, slavery, and NONE of its rules are universal.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

PS

We are seeing a "wonderful" example of price controls causing shortages, rationing, and violence in NYC. After many thousands of years of failed price controls [see 40 Centuries of Price and Wage Controls: https://mises.org/store/Forty-Centuries-of-Wage-and-Price-Controls-Digital-Book-P10512C94.aspx ], the state STILL hasn't learned its lesson, of course. Violence cannot solve complex social problems. If you wanted to overcome the increased scarcity of gas, food and other supplies after a hurricane, the price should go UP to incentivize entrepreneurs to provide them. But then the state never learns and doesn't care. All the state has is a big club and that is all it is interested in using.

[TheRedReaper]

Read later. In few days. Times up at internet shop./

[TheRedReaper]

I downloaded the PDF to memory stick to take back home. Will look at the book over the next week.
 

Finally I will tell you that values are subjective. Freedom is more valuable than wealth to me, for instance.

Well, I've always considered myself free. You appear to have been cowed by law. The problem is that a lot of people see law as a big brick wall where they must stop and turn back at. For me, it's just an obstacle to get around. I suppose that says a lot about how little respect I have for modern society. I don't mind. It's true.
 
I am free.
 
If someone were to come up to you in the street in your anarchist world and beat you bloody and steal your money, would you think that meant you weren't free? I doubt it. The thug was just something you encountered. So why do you view it differently in the current world? The thug is threatening you and stealing your money, and all of a sudden you're his slave? Why?
 
In my view, law is the consequence of choice. It is not the prevention of choice, however. You are still free to do entirely as you please, you just must weigh the consequences - what can you get away with, is it worth it, so on.
 
The world will always have bullies. Don't let them get to you. No man has the right to judge me or call himself my master. Those who presume to do so are fools. And when they try to arrest you, well, it is just another schoolyard brawl, no?

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

I define freedom as the absence of legalized aggression and coercion. Everyone who lives under a state is thus a slave. Some don't know it. Some don't want to know it. Some like being a well-tended slave or the illusion of it and some run the system to their tremendous advantage. An anarcho-capitalist system would be far more efficient at dealing with real crime, property-violent crime, through self-protection via unlicensed, unregulated, unscreened, untaxed, unlimited right to bear arms, through militia-neighborhood defense-private security, etc. All of these have proven far more efficient than socialized arbitration and security. You don't want a plumber or electrician you can't fire for bad performance so why would you want protection you can't fire and which can set its own price? Its a protection racket, pure and simple, not protection. You can't rob someone and then legitimately call it protection though the state has managed to achieve it through brainwashing.
 

And when they try to arrest you, well, it is just another schoolyard brawl, no?

Ahhh, no. See their violence against you is LEGAL. They are above the law, in short- allowed to do things that if YOU do are called crimes. Their rules are not universal and are thus not laws but crimes. Under anarcho-capitalism, all law is universal, is derived from the principle that no one may initiate aggression and coercion against another. Thus the private security in an ancap system must be very, very careful because they are 100% liable for their actions both civilly and criminally and subject to 3rd party arbitration, not an "internal investigation." And of course if they anger their customer, the person they are contracted to protect, they will simply be fired. Their business will suffer loss of profit and reputation and other security agencies will capitalize by offering superior service.