… You’re kidding, right? Are you 5, or something? It’s a serious question, I’m trying to understand how someone can write that down and be serious about it.
You will always need police, because there will always be misbehaving elements in society. Be it due to mental illness or plain psychopaths, doesn’t really matter, you need a trained group of people designated to be the ones to keep society nice. Let’s call them “police”
From the mad ramblings of what you wrote, it sounded like the description of police and a judge / justice system only much, much worse. You want random untrained idiots to decide on justice matters? I’m sorry no.
I want a judge who has been trained and learned how to be ethical and impartial. I want police that has been trained, especially in de-escalation, who have been checked for not being psychopaths.
There is nothing wrong with the basics of current police systems (not you US, you’re fucked up) we just need more focus on police being trained better (or, in case of the US, trained at all), being monitored better by independent groups to ensure abuses stay at a minimum.
We need changes like limiting net worth. If we limit net worth to (just an example) 1 million dollar and any income after that goes 100% to taxes, we don’t need to change anything else. Nobody can be super rich anymore, nobody can have crazy bad influence anymore, we’d literally be all the same.
Governments get huge tax incomes that can be used for free healthcare, free education, universal basic income, even. It’s a simple single change that will have the most impact.
… You’re kidding, right? Are you 5, or something? It’s a serious question, I’m trying to understand how someone can write that down and be serious about it.
I was answering a question I know the answer to, not proselytizing. But you stay classy, eh?
I answered the question accurately and good faith based on anarchist theory and actual implementations by anarchist autonomous zones like Mexico’s Zapatistas. If you don’t like the answer or agree with it philosophically, that is entirely on you.
… You’re kidding, right? Are you 5, or something? It’s a serious question, I’m trying to understand how someone can write that down and be serious about it.
You will always need police, because there will always be misbehaving elements in society. Be it due to mental illness or plain psychopaths, doesn’t really matter, you need a trained group of people designated to be the ones to keep society nice. Let’s call them “police”
From the mad ramblings of what you wrote, it sounded like the description of police and a judge / justice system only much, much worse. You want random untrained idiots to decide on justice matters? I’m sorry no.
I want a judge who has been trained and learned how to be ethical and impartial. I want police that has been trained, especially in de-escalation, who have been checked for not being psychopaths.
There is nothing wrong with the basics of current police systems (not you US, you’re fucked up) we just need more focus on police being trained better (or, in case of the US, trained at all), being monitored better by independent groups to ensure abuses stay at a minimum.
We need changes like limiting net worth. If we limit net worth to (just an example) 1 million dollar and any income after that goes 100% to taxes, we don’t need to change anything else. Nobody can be super rich anymore, nobody can have crazy bad influence anymore, we’d literally be all the same.
Governments get huge tax incomes that can be used for free healthcare, free education, universal basic income, even. It’s a simple single change that will have the most impact.
I was answering a question I know the answer to, not proselytizing. But you stay classy, eh?
So I enjoy good discourse, and I think most of your post is reasonable, but is it really necessary to start it off with insults and condescension?
I answered the question accurately and good faith based on anarchist theory and actual implementations by anarchist autonomous zones like Mexico’s Zapatistas. If you don’t like the answer or agree with it philosophically, that is entirely on you.