The clerico-libertarian anarchists at No Treason try to see how far I’ll go and I oblige.
As long as we’re talking rape, 2Blowhards is discussing the dispute between Heather Mac Donald and Cheryl Miller on the “campus rape industry” (I thought neocons weren’t supposed to paraphrase Finkelstein) here and here.
February 28, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Having read linked article, I don’t see how the term clerico-libertarian applies to me.
It is put forth there that the clerico liebertarian seeks: the presence of that kind of order which obtains when each member of a community agrees to want only the kind of order which will not interfere with the kind of order likely to be wanted by individuals who compose the rest of the community..
That’s not what I seek. As an anarchist I seek only stateless society, where states are understood to be monopolies of force. Marsden was saying the trouble with the “clerico-libertarians” is that they want “the self to ‘rule’ but it must first change itself.” I want you to be free to rule your life as you are; I don’t require that you change before we can live without states.
Why would I? I’m confident I’ll be better protected from sociopaths in a free market.
I am puzzled by this:
If we can get them how? Napolean *got* the better part of a continent but certainly not by means consistent with anarchy. I don’t have a problem with Napolean buying a continent if he can produce enough value to afford one.
Rape certainly can produce simple vulgar satisfaction – an orgasm for instance. So why wouldn’t you rape to attain that satisfaction if you could get away with it?
February 28, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I mainly just liked the term “clerico-libertarian”, which I had read before, and googled until I found the page again.
I want you to be free to rule your life as you are; I don’t require that you change before we can live without states.
You want me to be free to burn and pillage if I so choose?
Why would I? I’m confident I’ll be better protected from sociopaths in a free market.
By “protected”, you mean the freedom of sociopaths is to be restrained by some market mechanism. I want others to be restrained from preying on me (whether by a state monopoly of force or some unknown market mechanism) but I feel no obligation to restrain myself.
If we can get them how? Napolean *got* the better part of a continent but certainly not by means consistent with anarchy. I don’t have a problem with Napolean buying a continent if he can produce enough value to afford one.
And the Canadian and British governments are fine with you receiving medical care provided you don’t purchase it yourself but receive it from the State!
Rape certainly can produce simple vulgar satisfaction – an orgasm for instance. So why wouldn’t you rape to attain that satisfaction if you could get away with it?
Because I don’t think it will satisfy me, es tut mir leid. My instinctive attitude toward rape is one of disgust; I do not care for whether it is good or bad any more than I care if bacon is kosher as long as I enjoy eating it. I have put disgust toward rape and a desire to rape on the same level without any morality to distinguish them. I will act according to the feelings I possess and do not question why I am a certain why or feel the need to change myself to be otherwise. Having a disgust toward rape and people that I care about, if someone were to rape them I would be greatly upset and desire to punish them (perhaps with a broom-handle). I do not quibble over why my desire for certain people not to be raped and the rapist to be punished is to be privileged over the rapist’s desire to rape and not to be punished; my preferences are always my own priority and I feel free to ignore the preferences of others (such as the immigrants discussed in that thread).
February 28, 2008 at 7:08 pm
No, I said I wanted you to be free to rule *your own life*.
But theft does not disgust you?
You were acting according to the feelings you possess when you drank yourself to death’s door. Why change that?
February 28, 2008 at 7:46 pm
What component is it that differentiates rape from sex that doesn’t disgust you? Compulsion?
February 28, 2008 at 8:53 pm
No, I said I wanted you to be free to rule *your own life*.
Pillaging may well be part of my own life.
But theft does not disgust you?
Nope. It just doesn’t seem as visceral. Murder by carbon-monoxide poisoning also evinces less disgust than eating someone alive. Oddly enough, eating a dead person does not evoke disgust in me.
You were acting according to the feelings you possess when you drank yourself to death’s door. Why change that?
I underestimated my mortality, now I don’t feel like drinking.
What component is it that differentiates rape from sex that doesn’t disgust you? Compulsion?
I’m something of a prude in general, but something about it gives the sense of immersing onesself in misery.
February 28, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Partners could be miserable for other reasons. Consensual sex with a miserable partner wouldn’t disgust you the same way would it? It might hold no attraction to you, but if someone you cared about was miserable you probably wouldn’t feel the urge to punish their consnsual sex partners, would you? So what’s the difference in the acts?
February 28, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Consensual sex with a miserable partner does seem somewhat disgusting to me, though I still laugh at lines like “The lapdance is always better when the stripper’s crying”, just as I do for dead-baby jokes. I’ve always been confused by the rampant misogyny in pornography, why go the trouble of finding attractive women to display if you’re going to bring down the audience with that bile? It’s like taking a newly waxed sports-car and throwing mud all over it.
I find coprophagia disgusting, but I don’t care if anybody else engages in it. As long as I don’t have to watch and can pretend it doesn’t exist, I’m fine. Disgust isn’t sufficient to bring about a desire to punish, there needs to be some anger.
February 29, 2008 at 1:04 am
“Moral good is objective and a properly formed conscience can perceive it.”
–John Paul II, August 14, 1993, 10:30 p.m.
February 29, 2008 at 1:39 am
We’ll have none of that Roman popery here! This is an Uhmurricun blog! Yoo-Ese! Yoo-Ese!
February 29, 2008 at 10:04 am
“moral good is objective and a properly formed conscience can perceive that an angry lung is a glowing radioactive massive gamma radiation emitting lung and nobody wants that.”
- lung
p.s. are you finished with your left hand? lung needs to find her lost etch-a-sketch
February 29, 2008 at 10:18 am
“”Clerico-Libertarians”. That seems like a name to embrace. I’d rather be that than a n00b pleading for a beating, which is what TGGP is.”
- S.
February 29, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Okay, so in addition to disgust rape makes you angry. Why?
February 29, 2008 at 4:10 pm
are you finished with your left hand? lung needs to find her lost etch-a-sketch
Sorry to break it to you lung, but magic hands are just as imaginary as God and objective morality.
Sabotta, who is “S.”? Is that you? Are you quoting yourself?
Okay, so in addition to disgust rape makes you angry. Why?
It depends on who gets raped. My reaction to what is going on in Darfur is like that of Adam Smith’s enlightened gentleman to China.
February 29, 2008 at 5:17 pm
So there is a person P such that:
A. You would be angry if P were raped.
and
B. You would not be angry if P had consensual sex.
Right?
So with regard to P, what is the difference between rape and consensual sex that angers you?
February 29, 2008 at 7:10 pm
It would greatly upset P, who I care about (though not to the extent P cares about themselves).
February 29, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Why should P find it any more upsetting that consnsual sex? Surely P does not put any stock in the archaic notion that P’s preferences as to the disposition of P’s genitals ought to have priority over the preferences of the rapist. Why can’t P just lay back and enjoy the rapists preference?
February 29, 2008 at 8:25 pm
De gustibum non est disputandum. I feel no need to place my preferences under those of a stranger, P dismisses the preference of the rapist and since I like P, I will hold P’s preferences over the rapist. As for why P finds it upsetting, I believe a scientific explanation is put forth in “A Natural History of Rape”.
February 29, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Will it anger or disgust you if P rapes a stranger?
February 29, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Not nearly as much.