Yaron Answers: Should Government Be Able To Ban Unhealthy Things?

[halloranedward]

unfortunately, the founding fathers always thought the word "freedom" would be self explanatory, and could not have imagined the rise of socialism. this is why we need a commercial rights amendment, and a free market amendment.

[kasyapa]

Objectivists are not against a framework. They're quite strongly-frameworked people. They don't want a coercive framework.

[joshuawesome]

I agree with Yaron on this one. I think people should be allowed to make their own choices on what they want to eat or do. If people are provided with the information to make these choices, they should bear the positive or negative consequences of their actions.

[jasontch]

My opinion is gov can give advice, but cannot ban it

[feralandroid]

Somalia would be a good example of anarchy. The government does not have a well defined set of laws to protects it's citizen's freedom. That is what the government is for, to protect our freedom.

[megaminxmaster]

having a system in which capitalists market forces control everything is a totalitarian statist system; as i said in my other comment, Somalia is a good example. they have no gun laws, no education, no taxes, virtually no state intervention whatsoever. most third world countries have the same problem. and then there are state command economies on the other side of the spectrum such as North Korea, China, etc.

[kasyapa]

In non-crony-capitalism, "capitalists" (which is a non-existent bloc) do not control "market forces.: Somalia is not a free market - though note their progress in cellular telephone networks.

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... it was only when the state passed regulations such as minimum wage laws and child labor laws did workers start to gain more freedom (not much, but still).

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... in the 1880s and 90s, the French government was executing anarchists due to their political leanings; many anarchists then adopted the term "libertarian socialist" to describe their beliefs. i will define socialism so you may better understand why they did this: socialism is a social system in which the producers possess both political power and the means of producing and distributing goods. in capitalist society, minarchism would be a fucking disaster; Somalia is a good example.

[JohnSmith-vmrx]

No corporations should be able to falsely promote and advertise there harmful products without any government regulation to maximize there bottom line.

[megaminxmaster]

somalia is a capitalist nation, just like all other nations around the world; the difference between our system and theirs is that we have laws and regulations and they do not. as for you comparison of anarchy to the Somalian government, nothing could be further from the truth; anarchy is not a movement against government, it's a movement against HIERARCHY. all societies have government, including anarchist ones. what we advocate is a system in which the community controls their own society.

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... in my opinion, true and ideal minarchism would be completely non capitalist, which is not what objectivists advocate; it's quite the opposite. what you people also seem to forget is that we have already had free market capitalism before; it was called the Industrial revolution. children as young as 4 (or maybe younger) were forced to work in fatal conditions, causing death to hundreds of thousands of them (the # is not exact). not to mention the shitiest wages ever. CONTINUED...

[megaminxmaster]

capitalism, like socialism, (and all other political structures) is a spectrum, which you dont seem to get; as a general system, all capitalism means is the privatization of capital (the means of production). in other words, all centralized systems, whether they be state command economies or what is basically "stateless" capitalism (i used Somalia as an example of that) are capitalist. socialism on the other hand is a system in the means of production are controlled communally. CONTINUED...

[saegeoff]

Yaron, I agree with you on this 95%. I agree about the sodas, fats and all your other examples... If someone drinks tons of soda or eat lots of fat, that has no effect on me. That is their freedom and choice. However, you fail to define these rights you speak of, "the rights of an individual". An individual's rights end where another individual's rights begin. So an individual has the right to breath clean air. I think it agrees with your ideas but you contradict in your definition.

[megaminxmaster]

i never said capitalism was a social system; in fact its just the opposite (political centralization to put it simply). you seem to think that socialism is a centralized system, which it's not; socialism is simply when a society functions from the ground up instead of from above (like capitalism). CONTINUED...

[megaminxmaster]

check out the anarchistFAQ website

it accurately illustrates anarchist goals, means to achieve those goals, philosophies, etc.

[megaminxmaster]

obviously you think its a contradiction, which is nonsense. we advocate in alot of things, and one of the most important things is collective impute in most if not all aspects of life (in short decentralization). in other words, we want the people to control their societies as oppose to states or capitalist market forces like we have now.

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... as for "real capitalism, " THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "REAL CAPITALISM!" there is only capitalism and socialism; all other political systems branch off from them. for example, i am an anarchist, which also means im socialist, but i could also be communist, Marxist, communalist, market anarchist, etc. NO my capitalist friend, it seems YOU have no idea what capitalism is.

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... capitalism has virtually nothing with "individual rights" (or Islamic law;i have no idea why you brought that in lol). historically, the roots of capitalism began as early as the creation of agriculture; before that, women and men where treated equally and where provided everything they needed (everyone mutually helped each other). when the age of agriculture started, women were forced by men to work in the fields and so forth. CONTINUED...

[megaminxmaster]

CONTINUED... also, your perception of communism is very deluded; communism is simply anti hierarchical, anti market socialism (socialism is not always anti market contrary to common belief; market anarchism is an example). lastly, you seem to think that the founding fathers were libertarians. this is not the case; the founding fathers (some more than others) simply advocated oligopolization instead of monopolization (capitalism instead of a monarchy).CONTINUED...