If you lost your faith in religion would you still go to church?

If you lost your faith in religion would you still go to church? — NOS4A2

If you lost your faith in the state wouldn't you still live in the state? It's institutions, its laws, its power would remain as they are.

I’m not so sure about that. The Catholic Church, once the most dominant influence in the west, has no such power. Centuries of “reformation” is all it took.

Centuries of “reformation” is all it took. — NOS4A2

So is your argument that "we only need to stop thinking in statist terms and the rest will follow" in a few centuries of "reformation"?

Sure. If you have a better idea I’m all ears.

You follow their rules for funding, not because you require an authority to govern your life. Presumably you would follow the rules according to any source of funding, not just state funding? — NOS4A2

I require the funding, so I follow the rules, plus following the rules saves lives.

There isn't any source of funding other than the government, not that could do what Medicare does.

A better idea than thinking that not thinking in statist terms will lead to a "reformation" in a few centuries that will do away with the state?

Well since you are convinced we should do away with the state, thinking in terms of how to do away with it and what to replace it with. I dont see how you could do the former without thinking in terms of the state, which is not the same as your misguided, myoptic, caricature of the state, and the latter cannot be accomplished by replacing people as they are with people as you want them to be.

You position reminds me of that of a privledged child who wishes mommy and daddy would just go away so he could do whatever he wants.

You position reminds me of that of a privledged child who wishes mommy and daddy would just go away so he could do whatever he wants. — Fooloso4

Your position sounds like that of a person who can't think through an issue.

If one thinks through an issue it should be apparent that despite the restrictions imposed by the state we enjoy many benefits that most would not be willing to give up.

If one thinks through an issue it should be apparent that despite the restrictions imposed by the state we enjoy many benefits that most would not be willing to give up. — Fooloso4

His question is whether people need state governance in order to enjoy those things. Marx said ultimately, no. What do you say?

Historically, hospitals have been funded from many sources, much of which were not from the government.

I’m not convinced we should do without the state. I’m only convinced the state should not operate like a criminal organization.

Your position reminds me of the happy slave myth.

Historically, hospitals have been funded from many sources, much of which were not from the government. — NOS4A2

Which lives would you like to stop saving so we can go back to historic practices?

I was speaking of funding, not practices. I assume that had you worked in one of those places you wouldn’t require a public authority to govern your day-to-day.

NOS has faith in what he calls a

fully developed morality — NOS4A2

If all or even most people were self-governing then there would be no need for governments. Do you share his faith?

You didn’t develop any ideas, principles, and corresponding behaviors as you grew up? How do you survive?

I’m only convinced the state should not operate like a criminal organization. — NOS4A2

So is it that you are not opposed to statism but rather to particular practices of the state?

Your position reminds me of the happy slave myth. — NOS4A2

I have not stated a position. I recognize that we enjoy certain benefits being citizens of a state, but do not accept your view that citizens are slaves.

I was speaking of funding, not practices. I assume that had you worked in one of those places you wouldn’t require a public authority to govern your day-to-day. — NOS4A2

American healthcare, as we know it today, wouldn't be possible without Medicare funding.

You want to go back to 1960s funding, but keep the same level of care? I don't think that's going to work.

If all or even most people were self-governing then there would be no need for governments. Do you share his faith? — Fooloso4

I won't live to see it, but I heartily commend those whose optimism creates such bold visions of what we could be.

You didn’t develop any ideas, principles, and corresponding behaviors as you grew up? How do you survive? — NOS4A2

I did, but did so within a state that promoted equality and the values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is evident that not everyone in this state abides by these principles, at least when it comes to how they treat others.

So is that that you are not opposed to statism but rather to particular practices of the state?

I’m opposed to both, though I have always admitted my own statism.

I have not stated a position. I recognize that we enjoy certain benefits being citizens of a state, but do not accept your view that citizens are slaves.

Slaves had certain benefits. Their master would feed and house them, for example.

I did, but did so within a state that promoted equality and the values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is evident that not everyone in this state abides by these principles, at least when it comes to how they treat others.

And there is not one single value the that it hasn’t violated. It also promotes war, racism, brigandage, robbery, you name it.

Are we to conclude from this that whatever your hope for the future may be, you recognize the need for the state today?

American healthcare, as we know it today, wouldn't be possible without Medicare funding.

You want to go back to 1960s funding, but keep the same level of care? I don't think that's going to work.

I didn’t say I want to go back to any sort of funding, only pointing out government funding isn’t required for healthcare.

Are we to conclude from this that whatever your hope for the future may be, you recognize the need for the state today? — Fooloso4

Sure.

I didn’t say I want to go back to any sort of funding, only pointing out government funding isn’t required for healthcare. — NOS4A2

I just told you it is. Without Medicare, most US hospitals would have to close their doors.

Slaves had certain benefits. — NOS4A2

They do. But those who are not slaves often, but not always, enjoy greater benefits. In any case, it does follow that being a citizen is to be a slave.

I just told you it is. Without Medicare, most US hospitals would have to close their doors.

And I just disagreed with you for the reasons I stated.

And I just disagreed with you for the reasons I stated. — NOS4A2

I don't think you're particularly well informed on the issue, then.

And there is not one single value the that it hasn’t violated. It also promotes war, racism, brigandage, robbery, you name it. — NOS4A2

Are you claiming that without the state these things would not occur?

Are you claiming that without the state these things would not occur?

No, I’m just wondering if you developed ideas, principles, and corresponding behaviors in a state that promotes war, slavery, bigotry, imperialism, you name it.