How is Putin's military draft any different from a form of slavery ?
- Thread starter Rob Roy
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
no capitalization. His purple heart is a matter of cardiology.
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
One difference is that, before the draft, you would need to be a willing participant in society where these draft laws exist, a society with laws which you were free to get away from at any time you want. Don't forget, Russia has been committing murder/rape/torture on a national scale for seven months now, so we didn't just blink and find ourselves right here. Same as how we're a willing participant with all the laws in the US, which of course we may not like, but obviously accept with our continued willing presence.
That's closer to buyer's remorse than it is slavery. If some potential legal result is truly intolerable, then fight to change it as if your life depends on it, especially when it literally does, or go someplace where society's beliefs better match your own. Or, I guess you can do what you do, which is to whine about how society should conform to your desires while you do nothing to make it happen, kind of like you expect it to happen via.....cough*mind control*cough, but it might not give you the desired results.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
So people should decide to be born in a place that doesn't feature a military draft then ?
Buyer's remorse? That's a lousy analogy. In a real seller / buyer situation, people have the option of saying no thanks or I'll buy from someone else. In government related "seller / buyer" situations, and especially with a military draft the option of saying no thanks comes with dire consequences.
I haven't forgotten what Russia has been doing....they're a distant second or third to what the USA does, but still noteworthy in their thuggery.
As far as what I do, I foment ideas, nothing changes until people gain understanding.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
the “no true Scotsman” fallacy.
The trouble is, you base much of your utopian sermons on it.
Tell me how two judicial systems might compete for the same notional customer — while still doing their appointed jobs.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Tell me how a judicial system that is a large part of a forcible monopoly, an injustice itself, can be the arbiter of justice ? That'd be like going to a rapist seeking dating advice.
There's more than one market supplier for many things, groceries for instance.
Your problem is you don't understand the feedback mechanism in a free market
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Don’t reframe the question; answer it. The analogy to merchants fails.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I did answer it. You either ignored it or don't comprehend. Perhaps poor extrapolative powers on your part. Consumer feedback exists as a regulatory tool in a free market. That's the succinct answer.
In an unfree market for justice, you can't really fire the judge or his retinue. In a free market for justice, people who render bad decisions won't get very many repeat customers, people who do, will.
dstroy
Well-Known Member
Rob toes the line.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
No; you moved the goalposts. The question is: describe how two judicial systems competing for the same notional customer operate.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I know it's a hard concept for those infatuated with themselves to grasp, but society wasn't created for you when you were born, you were born into a preexisting society and that society has rules which has been around long before you have and they grossly outweigh your wants and desires. If every Rob Roy out there got their way and society existed in the manner they wanted, laws would be changing a thousand times a second and this would be the dumbest country on earth.
It's a much closer analogy than slavery, which nobody signed up for. Once you're aware of something and choose to exist in its sphere, you have accepted it and what it has to offer. With your awareness today, you have bought into this society as a willing participant whether you like it or not. Even though your mouth says "no", your complete lack of effort to change your situation screams "yes". And as we all know, actions speak louder than words. Yap-yap-yap only gets you so far.
Understanding is certainly A step, but it's not THE step, nor is it a last step before change. In the stepping stones of change, you stopped at step 3 of 10, because after that, it gets, like...too hard and stuff.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
It's very likely that competing service providers would have some forms of cooperation to accomodate this. Don't USPS and UPS cooperate on some things, even though they are competitors ?
Also, customer feedback, again. If your justice provider had a reputation for rendering good decisions, you'd probably like that they make an effort to work with other reputable service providers too.
It's not in the interest of a free market supplier to gain a reputation for thuggery. It's part of the business model for an unfree market "justice system" though.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
There would be no victimless crimes and peaceful people would be free to live their lives. That's pretty scary huh?