tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post6110142317384047684..comments2024-03-26T15:19:23.091-07:00Comments on false dichotomy by charles davis: In the land of the freeCharles Davishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06005070529766546097noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post-22627338005884076222011-06-24T10:10:45.571-07:002011-06-24T10:10:45.571-07:00The disparity is clear. On the one hand, you have ...The disparity is clear. On the one hand, you have a powerless person daring to tell those in power that his "crime" is actually protected by the highest law in the land, and on the other hand, you have a representative of power who "merely" killed one of the nameless, powerless hordes. The dichotomy between those in power and those without is the true dichotomy, for sure.Thom Fooleryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12818320706747408688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post-27415934480724870242011-06-23T23:55:28.839-07:002011-06-23T23:55:28.839-07:00p.s. though I didn't intend my comment towards...p.s. though I didn't intend my comment towards you personally, I certainly didn't make that clear in my initial post. My bad.Brian Drakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post-76256331825829298342011-06-23T23:52:57.927-07:002011-06-23T23:52:57.927-07:00Charles,
I wasn't really directing my comment...Charles,<br /><br />I wasn't really directing my comment towards you. It was more a general comment. I already perceived you don't buy into that nonsense, and were simply "applying their own logic" to demonstrate the absurdity of treating "horticulture as a greater crime than homicide".<br /><br />Great blog, keep it up.Brian Drakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post-15688405294608526162011-06-23T20:31:24.778-07:002011-06-23T20:31:24.778-07:00Whoa now, I'm not defending the notion of a &q...Whoa now, I'm not defending the notion of a "social contract," I'm trying to undermine it by pointing out the unequal terms upon which the purportedly binding contract is based. An agent of the state breaks a law, be it a policeman or a president, and the worst that happens is a slap on the wrist. But if a mere citizen -- a subject -- breaks a law, they get the book thrown at them over something as minor as growing a taboo plant. Meanwhile, torturers and war criminals walk free, facing no consequences for their state-sanctioned crimes.<br /><br />A contract that only one party can enforce isn't a contract, it's a dictate, a set of rules binding only on citizens, not their rulers. The "social contract" is a post-facto rationalization for government that in no way reflects the way in which states are, or have ever been, born.<br /><br />Harrumph.<br /><br />See also:http://charliedavis.blogspot.com/search?q=lysander+spoonerCharles Davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06005070529766546097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339045.post-20955260555493020722011-06-23T18:18:53.345-07:002011-06-23T18:18:53.345-07:00What contract? Read Lysander Spooner's "N...What contract? Read Lysander Spooner's "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority" for a thorough debunking of the absurd claim there is a "social contract". People have a religious faith in such a contract, but no such contract exists.Brian Drakenoreply@blogger.com