[ExI] Just some thoughts, nothing new really

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Sun May 19 13:13:13 UTC 2019

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 3:34 AM Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com>

>> So you have the right to exclude anyone you don't approve of from
>> inhabiting the planet Earth, your "home".
> > ### Yes, obviously.

Is it just you or do I have that right too?  If I don't want to associate
with you in my "home" do I have the right to kick you off the planet Earth
and send you into death?

*>>> **So let me ask you the question again - according to you, at which
>>> level of organization do I lose the right to exclude others?*
>> >> Level 42.
> > ### Ah, yes, all this sound and fury, the moral certitude, the
> supercilious comments

I admit it, at this point I'm more interested in practical polacy questions
(like what maximizes my survival chances)  than I am debating which branch
of libertarian theology is morally superior.  As for certitude, even when
dealing with questions that have unique objective answers one can be
absolutely positively 100% certain about them and still be dead wrong, in
fact such a thing is very common. To make it even worse you like to ask
purely moral questions that have no unique objective answer and are
uninterested in the practical consequences of your policies even if they
are utterly disastrous.

> t*he supercilious comments, but when I ask you a simple question about
> your moral rules, you refuse to answer.*

I'll tell you the exact dividing line between home and not-home as soon as
you tell me the exact point between 90 and 900 pounds where a thin man can
gain one ounce and be instantaneously transformed into a fat man.

> *we do not feel free to compel association with others by force.*

But you **do** feel free to use force to compel others not to associate
with you in your "home" even if your "home" is every square inch of the
only known inhabited planet in the observable universe.

> > *we distrust large organizations, especially ones that can use
> violence, propaganda and intimidation.*

Does that include Fox News and The National Enquirer?

> > *I do not know if the economy will flourish insanely thanks to AI, or
> if it implodes in the runaway debt-and-tax spiral*

I can't predict the future in any detail, but I do know if AI continues to
develop, and the only thing that could stop it is if we destroy ourselves
first, then it will produce astronomical amounts of wealth. I don't know
how that wealth will be distributed but I do know some ways will produce
great social instability and some less.

> *>  I do know that many illegal immigrants are less intelligent, more
> violent than the current majority of Americans,*

Did you gain that knowledge from reading tea leaves or by inspecting the
entrails of sacrificed animals?

> *> It's stupid to have illegal immigration that biologically and
> culturally replaces our society. It goes against the libertarian principle
> of freedom of association. *

Take a look at this graph:

Illegal immigration

The problem of illegal immigration seemed well on its way to being solved
but then Trump got elected, intensified the war on drugs and cut off aid to
Central American countries causing social upheaval and millions of people
fleeing for their lives from starvation and murderous drug cartels.

* > And again you are trying to bring the discussion down from considering
> questions in moral philosophy to the level of simple politicking. *

Bring the discussion down? I am trying, with little success, to get you to
elevate the conversation and stop asking pointless questions in moral
philosophy that can never have a unique objective answer and have all the
importance of calculating the number of angels that can dance on the head
of a pin; I am trying to get you to help us figure out the best (or at
least a better) social policy that *might* enable us to make it through the
meat grinder that is the singularity.

> > *As I told you, I will not engage in a political discussion with you.*

And that sort of attitude is the reason the Libertarian Party has never
been able to accomplish anything constructive (I don't consider getting
Trump elected to be constructive).

 John K Clark

> If Trump polemics is the only thing you can do, you have to find another
> partner.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190519/448d41cc/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list