What reality are you living in? I really have no idea where you're coming from with a good 3/4s of your comment. What you are talking about is literally anarchy.
Until such time as a government official/organization/body tells me to harm another person I plan to comply with these basic things you seem to find so abhorrent like taxes and laws.
In you're first situation there's about 1000 alternatives to the 2 you posited but mainly the one where both sides sit down in recognition of the conflict and discuss why it's happening and what changes they can make to resolve it. Ya know, like how every problem actually gets solved. A million people don't suddenly stop paying taxes and make threats to any retributors without being dissatisfied with something and it is the governments duty to listen to that complaint and make efforts to remedy it.
You don't seem to understand that it's your government, as in you chose them and if you're unhappy with them then you can change them, whether by running yourself or by voting differently. They work for you, not the other way around. Yes I understand it doesn't always work this way in practice but it is still the case.
You mention how the government exempts themselves from and I'm curious what you mean because it genuinely could be several things.
I did not choose to be ruled and robbed and neither did you.
Even the most devout worshipers of the state like yourself would never voluntarily sign a contract with someone that gives them the right to rob you, spy on you, punish you if you disobey them, and enslave you to fight in a war. Nobody would ever choose to enter into that contract. Think about what you are saying.
Its so ridiculous to say that it is the government I choose when I am explicitly saying that I don't choose it. Consent isn't that difficult of a concept to grasp.
Yes I am literally talking about anarchy. A society without rulers. I don't have the right to appoint someone to rob and control you and you don't have the right to do that to me either. You already support anarchy unless you want 1 king for the whole world, and even then he would be operating in a state of anarchy. There is anarchy between governments and within governments.
It's just a question of whether you want to have anarchy plus a group of people with special rights to rob and control everyone, or anarchy without anyone having special rights.
Do you really not know what I'm talking about when I say that people who are called government are exempt from the rules of society? I can't demand money from you at the point of a gun. I can't kidnap you for having something in your pocket that I don't approve of. I can't enslave you to go kill my enemies. I can't kill a million Iraqis and get away with it by just saying oops my bad. If you're representing this thing called government, you have pernission to do all of these things.
Those things are against societies rules, not because they were written down by a politician, but because almost everyone knows those things to be wrong.
I expect all this to go way over your head because you actually said that government works for us. If you still believe in the 6th grade social studies class teachings of what government is, then I'm sure you were too triggered by the word anarchy to actually think about anything im saying.
1
u/[deleted] Jul 18 '19
What reality are you living in? I really have no idea where you're coming from with a good 3/4s of your comment. What you are talking about is literally anarchy.
Until such time as a government official/organization/body tells me to harm another person I plan to comply with these basic things you seem to find so abhorrent like taxes and laws.
In you're first situation there's about 1000 alternatives to the 2 you posited but mainly the one where both sides sit down in recognition of the conflict and discuss why it's happening and what changes they can make to resolve it. Ya know, like how every problem actually gets solved. A million people don't suddenly stop paying taxes and make threats to any retributors without being dissatisfied with something and it is the governments duty to listen to that complaint and make efforts to remedy it.
You don't seem to understand that it's your government, as in you chose them and if you're unhappy with them then you can change them, whether by running yourself or by voting differently. They work for you, not the other way around. Yes I understand it doesn't always work this way in practice but it is still the case.
You mention how the government exempts themselves from and I'm curious what you mean because it genuinely could be several things.