Mountain man verses Big Brother

Oops nvm

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Oops nvm

Nice kill.

Originally posted by JS357
It is always a balancing act, and there will be discontents.

"... Sigmund Freud enumerates what he sees as the fundamental tensions between civilization and the individual. The primary friction, he asserts, stems from the individual's quest for instinctual freedom and civilization's contrary demand for conformity and instinctual repression. Freud states tha ...[text shortened]... scontent in its citizens."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_and_Its_Discontents

Thinks people that desire freedom do so because they want to kill🙄
Equates adultery with murder🙄
Man is a dumb beast driven by instinct, (and the contradiction)he needs other men to tell him how to live🙄
Measures increased civilization by decreased freedom 🙄

I measure a civilized society by the extent to which men deal with each other voluntarily.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Thinks people that desire freedom do so because they want to kill🙄
Equates adultery with murder🙄
Man is a dumb beast driven by instinct, (and the contradiction)he needs other men to tell him how to live🙄
Measures increased civilization by decreased freedom 🙄

I measure a civilized society by the extent to which men deal with each other voluntarily.

You seem to be one of the existing civilization's more discontent.

Originally posted by JS357
"Ardent desire" suggests discontent will accompany an absence of peace. I don't see any contradiction between being discontented at the loss of freedoms that civilization brings, and being discontented if one cannot live a peaceable life in the manner of one's choosing.

However, Freud is generalizing, that is true.

old Freud , he is like a blind man gardening.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
old Freud , he is like a blind man gardening.

I think a discussion of the idea would be more interesting than a discussion of the person. Do you think that, given our nature, the establishment of government is inevitable, and inevitably engenders discontent? It may be that Jehovah's Witnesses and people of certain Eastern traditions can find their way out of this conflict, by peaceable detachment.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I've never met any person who argued for central planning or "big government". Where do you meet these people?

Almost everyone in US politics both R and D are among those.

Originally posted by JS357
You seem to be one of the existing civilization's more discontent.

"You seem to be one of the existing civilization's more discontent."

Exactly the opposite. Wajoma and most libertarians silently endure most of the unnecessary intrusions on their liberty, while statists on the right and left harp constantly on their notions of how to fix everything perfectly.

We complain only when the State's rules are in our face, on stepping on our toes. Otherwise we happily go about ignoring those rules that are seldom enforced.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I believe you may be right about more people building their own homes. In Zambia where we have very relaxed enforcement of building standards, many people do build their own homes and do a very bad job of it. In South Africa, standards are stricter, and many poorer people who, in Zambia, would be building as a form of investment, do not do so, but live in ...[text shortened]... ilding codes, I think it is better to make it easier for people to meet the necessary standards.

There is probably a happy medium, with some oversight, but not oppression. As you point out, poorer people can build basic shelter, perhaps not to standards we might approve of, but what they can afford. Is it better to insist on standards that the poor can't meet, or allow them to build what they can afford?

Originally posted by normbenign
There is probably a happy medium, with some oversight, but not oppression. As you point out, poorer people can build basic shelter, perhaps not to standards we might approve of, but what they can afford. Is it better to insist on standards that the poor can't meet, or allow them to build what they can afford?

That's something that I think liberals are unable to see. They like to think that they are for the little guy, but their policies make it so that the little guy suffers and only the rich live well.

Liberals like to jack up fuel prices, which means that the poor have even less money after paying for fuel to get to work and home.

In places like Oregon liberals put into place policies that require large amounts of land to build in some of the more scenic areas. How many average individuals can afford to buy 200 acres of land to build a house? Only the rich get to live in the beautiful lands while the average guy gets stuck in high density living in the cities.

Using the government to make it so expensive that the little guy is stuck, that's what liberals do. The super rich Republicans like that too since they don't want to look at the average guy either, unless the average guy is his servant.