[CARTOON] "24 Types of Authoritarian" - Are you One of These?

[Sentient Void]

http://libertariansavvy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/24typesauthredosize.jpg

I can proudly say that I am none of these.

Can you?

/methinks there should be a box for "The Protectionist".

No offense, Anti-Federalist ;)

[Anti Federalist]

I can proudly say that I am none of these.

Can you?

/methinks there should be a box for "The Protectionist".

No offense, Anti-Federalist ;)

None taken.

I can see every one of these "factions" being implemented at a corporate/business level. In fact, in many cases in our history, it already has, mandatory company church attendance and so on.

What is the difference if you are forced to comply with tyranny because a gun shoved in your face, or you're threatened with starvation.

Works out the same for me.

Corporate tyranny is as bad as government tyranny.

[Sentient Void]

What is the difference if you are forced to comply with tyranny because a gun shoved in your face, or you're threatened with starvation.

Well, for one - one is a positive act by an individual or a group of individuals - the other is not. One is an initiation of aggression, the other is not.

Careful there, AF... the slippery slope of that statement is redistributionist/Statist in nature :eek:

[Freedom 4 all]

I can see every one of these "factions" being implemented at a corporate/business level. In fact, in many cases in our history, it already has, mandatory company church attendance and so on.

Am I reading that right? They actually make you go to church if you are in a certain company? I've never heard of anything like that before but it's insane.

[Sentient Void]

Although I agree that it's retarded, and probably not good business practice (since it has nothing to do with seeking of profit), I would say it is well within the right of an individual and their business to require you to go to church on condition of employment...

But again, I think it's bad business - and it might be why although it does happen - it's quite rare.

This practice would repel otherwise solid, productive, reliable employees who don't want to attend the church, and attract only the most desperate potential employees that are willing to do anything for a job (apart from ones that already like that church of course).

[Grubb556]

Damn, those maochists are sick.

[Anti Federalist]

Am I reading that right? They actually make you go to church if you are in a certain company? I've never heard of anything like that before but it's insane.

Yes, Henry Ford was one of pioneers the concept of the "paternalistic employer" where your private life would be controlled by the company, what you ate, how and where you worshiped, while living in company rent houses and buying in company stores that would all be under company control.

There are many other examples of "planned corporate communities" from the late 19th and early 20th century that mirror this image.

It was even named "Fordism" and happily embraced by Joe Stalin in the USSR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordism

Then there are the well documented instances of miners in the WV hills being subjected to the "company scrip" that you got paid in, and had to use at the "company store" and pay for your "company home".

I'll leave it to you to determine whether, once something like that takes hold, and you would have no chance to conduct business or have a job without compliance, if that constitutes "tyranny".

Mental gymnastics to the contrary notwithstanding, I say it sure as shit does.

[Matt Collins]

This was a response to this image:















http://www.leftycartoons.com/wp-content/uploads/types_of_libertarian1.png

[Sentient Void]

Wow, I was actually not familiar with 'Fordism' or 'post-fordism'.

Very interesting wikipedia article on it. I would definitely say that that US (government and corporations) has certainly modeled / socially engineered itself in the fashion of fordist and now post-fordist economic philosophy.

[Anti Federalist]

This was a response to this image

Actually, yours came first, SV's image was the response.

[Anti Federalist]

Wow, I was actually not familiar with 'Fordism' or 'post-fordism'.

Very interesting wikipedia article on it. I would definitely say that that US (government and corporations) has certainly modeled / socially engineered itself in the fashion of fordist and now post-fordist economic philosophy.

Glad you enjoyed the read, and maybe it shed a little light on where I'm coming from.

[Sentient Void]

Glad you enjoyed the read, and maybe it shed a little light on where I'm coming from.

Though it does shed some light on why you're coming from where you do, it doesn't change the realities nor my views of maximizing free trade regardless of anything vs engaging in protectionism, if that's what you're referrng to. If anything, it bolsters it.

Do you feel it should, my droog? If so, why?

[Anti Federalist]

Though it does shed some light on why you're coming from where you do, it doesn't change the realities nor my views of maximizing free trade regardless of anything vs engaging in protectionism, if that's what you're referrng to. If anything, it bolsters it.

Do you feel it should, my droog? If so, why?

Without engaging in "a little of the old ultra violence", I'd not think that it would. ;)

My position remains the same as well.

[Sentient Void]

Without engaging in "a little of the old ultra violence", I'd not think that it would. ;)

My position remains the same as well.

;-)

Welly-welly-welly-welly-well! Appy-polly-logies. We wouldn't want to spill out any of the 'red red kroovy', now would we?

You filthy old soomka!

[Anti Federalist]

;-)

Welly-welly-welly-welly-well! Appy-polly-logies. We wouldn't want to spill out any of the 'red red kroovy', now would we?

You filthy old soomka!

Totally off topic, but I finally got around to reading the book a few months ago.

It was well worth it.

Now, I'm off for an eggiweg and some lovely Ludwig Van.

[Freedom 4 all]

Yes, Henry Ford was one of pioneers the concept of the "paternalistic employer" where your private life would be controlled by the company, what you ate, how and where you worshiped, while living in company rent houses and buying in company stores that would all be under company control.

There are many other examples of "planned corporate communities" from the late 19th and early 20th century that mirror this image.

It was even named "Fordism" and happily embraced by Joe Stalin in the USSR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fordism

Then there are the well documented instances of miners in the WV hills being subjected to the "company scrip" that you got paid in, and had to use at the "company store" and pay for your "company home".

I'll leave it to you to determine whether, once something like that takes hold, and you would have no chance to conduct business or have a job without compliance, if that constitutes "tyranny".

Mental gymnastics to the contrary notwithstanding, I say it sure as shit does.

I suppose it depends on whether one is a libertarian or an anarchist. If one believes government should not exist, then without rules or regulations of any kind there would be nothing to stop this. However, if one believes in a minarchist/libertarian government that exists solely to protect the rights of individuals, then they should put an end to this as it violates the whole "life, liberty and security of person" and freedom of worship thing. The sad fact is that the concept of constitutional rights cannot exist without an enforcing body. With no law, your constitutional rights are meaningless and will simply be violated by people independent of the government instead of people in the government itself. I lean towards the minarchist/libertarian myself, so I am inclined to agree that kind of corporate tyranny should not be tolerated.

[Anti Federalist]

I suppose it depends on whether one is a libertarian or an anarchist. If one believes government should not exist, then without rules or regulations of any kind there would be nothing to stop this. However, if one believes in a minarchist/libertarian government that exists solely to protect the rights of individuals, then they should put an end to this as it violates the whole "life, liberty and security of person" and freedom of worship thing. The sad fact is that the concept of constitutional rights cannot exist without an enforcing body. With no law, your constitutional rights are meaningless and will simply be violated by people independent of the government instead of people in the government itself. I lean towards the minarchist/libertarian myself, so I am inclined to agree that kind of corporate tyranny should not be tolerated.

Yes, this is exactly where I am as well.

Furthermore, the least invasive and least economically harmful form of taxation to fund such a government are tariffs.