i'm a walking contradiction.

[Brad Reddekopp]

The fact that I find your positions on many of these questions not worth considering because they are firmly rooted in statism doesn't mean that I am unaware of what you are saying or that I don't understand it.

In other words, you are unwilling to address an argument against your beliefs and refuse to consider evidence that might contradict them.

More accurately, I've been through all this beginner stuff over and over again and I'm tired of addressing it.

[campershell dreams]

campershell dreams, thanks for joining. Your perspective could give some insight that may be lacking here. I just wanted to ask a quick question.

the concept of a soldier as someone who is an individual, with his or her own values or experiences,

What do you tend to do when those values contradict the orders a superior gives?

well, the one time that i was explicitly ordered to shoot a guy, i declined. even though the guy in question was in the position to kill me and the rest of my team.

anyway, you guys bring up a lot of interesting points. fortunately for me, i have firsthand, inside knowledge of both the military and war, so i'll just console myself with that. you guys have respectable opinions concerning something you are not a part of. that is fine with me. i agree with the fact that the military is a weapon of mass murder, but i disagree with the implication you guys are making that every single soldier who joins up is aware of this fact or thinks of it in those terms. "welcome to boot camp. when this is over with, you'll know mass murder like the back of your hand." i did not announce to my parents, "well, i think doing mass murder for a livng sounds pretty good, don't you?" the military is a lot of dumb people who got duped or people so entrenched in statism that they are not aware of the alternative. i was this person until about half a year ago. i will gladly get out when my contract ends. anyway, that's all i have to say on the matter.

[Nokes]

This got ugly fast huh? Anyway, hello.

[Hierophant]

Campershell dreams, I think that what you're saying is rather disingenuous, given how the military is being sold to young people: with ads showing people with rifles and talking about being "army strong," with shooter video games, and with the current war in Iraq. Any given person may think that what the military does is good (although I really have no idea how this can possibly happen, neither do I really want to), but there's no way they are getting in with the impression that this has nothing to do with killing people.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with "firsthand, inside knowledge." A recruit has no "firsthand, inside knowledge," only what he can see in the media and hears from his friends and family. That is what he sees in the news, what he sees in the ads and what he sees in his games.

I am not interested in being your friend or in you respecting me. I couldn't care less if you hate me. All I want is for you to acknowledge the truth.

[Dil]

In your position, I suggest you do not talk to franc,

If you don't want him to understand Anarchism (you guys are doing a very bad job right now) or how he's living or not living in accordance with his values, then you're right, he shouldn't talk to me.

He admits he's not living in accordance to his values at the moment. And we do want him to understand the moral premises of anarchism, we just don't think it's necessary to call him an evil faggot.

This may surprise you, but for people with no strong moral core, the army is just a job and they don't associate it with murder (cognitive dissonance going on here). They think it's a necessary evil, that somebody's gotta do the job. This guy, clearly joined when his value system was not completely formed, and he's stuck with a four year contract now or something.

Milgram's experiments proved that ordinary people can easily be persuaded to atrocity. I think you should take a long and deep look at the people around you. Most of them are capable of being in the army. Most of them are capable of atrocity and are easily persuaded into it. Authority makes someone with no strong moral code fold up like a house of cards, but that doesn't make them evil. That makes them your next door neighbor, completely ordinary.

[Hierophant]

I hope you don't think you're telling me anything new. I am already very well scared of what Normals can be made to do.

[Dil]

I hope you don't think you're telling me anything new. I am already very well scared of what Normals can be made to do.

Well, then you should know he's pretty much a norm, and that shows he isn't particularly evil or good.

Most norms don't think the army in itself is evil, so obviously norms can and do join the army.

Is that evil? Well, if you consider the run of the mill joe evil, then sure. But you have an extremely strange definition of evil if you think that.

[Hierophant]

I think the run-of-the-mill average Joe can be turned evil pretty easily, and you already pointed out the evidence on that topic.

[Dil]

I think the run-of-the-mill average Joe can be turned evil pretty easily, and you already pointed out the evidence on that topic.

Ok, at first this idea, might blow your mind, but normal people with no particular malice, can commit atrocity. They aren't turned evil by authority, they're still morally coreless, unable to be good or bad. Milgram's results were very specific: Authority allows ordinary people to do horrible things.

It does not talk about turning them evil because this does not occur for norms. You do get a higher number of sadists and sickos in the army though just because it allows them a venue to inflict their horrid desires on people, but most of the people in the army are norms.

I suggest you watch or read "The Reader" and that might help you understand.

[Hierophant]

You are assuming Normals can't be evil, or that being evil requires a certain specialness. I don't believe that to be the case.

[Centurijohn]

Yet there are objective criteria which make an estimate of the truth-content of such an opinion feasible.

What objective criteria, brain states? The brain states of the majority would determine the same judgment?

No, not brain states, I'm talking about evidence in the form of posts which everyone can check to see whether it is indicative of dickhead-ism.

[Centurijohn]

More accurately, I've been through all this beginner stuff over and over again and I'm tired of addressing it.

That even beginner stuff contains arguments backed up by evidence against some of your notions is indeed interesting to note, but you have your free will.

[Brad Reddekopp]

We need to set up a reading list or a FAQ to which we can direct people who ask the questions that statists frequently ask when they encounter basic anarchistic ideas. That way, people like me who become instantly impatient with such questions will have a nearly-all-encompassing response.

[Centurijohn]

We need to set up a reading list or a FAQ to which we can direct people who ask the questions that statists frequently ask when they encounter basic anarchistic ideas. That way, people like me who become instantly impatient with such questions will have a nearly-all-encompassing response.

That is an idea, but would people get the opportunity to question the answers to the questions, or ask different questions regarding the same topics?

[campershell dreams]

All I want is for you to acknowledge the truth.

okay: i am an evil faggot. you got me.