Freedomain Radio

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/how-to-lose-readers-without-even-trying/

For what it’s worth—and it won’t be worth much to many of you—I understand the ethical and economic concerns about taxation. I agree that everyone should be entitled to the fruits of his or her labors and that taxation, in the State of Nature, is a form of theft. But it appears to be a form of theft that we require, given how selfish and shortsighted most of us are.

Ooooh, Sammy boy!  

given how selfish and shortsighted most of us are.

Yep, sinners... 

But it appears to be a form of theft that we require

Yup, selfish sinners require theft

 How many times can people miss this core contradiction?     Here we go again:

IF people are too selfish/stupid to be trusted to solve social problems voluntarily, then they are too stupid and selfish to be trusted with violence.

IF people can't be trusted with their own body/property, how can they be trusted with controlling the body/property of others?

...it gets so so boring to even have to bring it up.

EDIT:  Since I'm in China, I don't have access to most blogs.  Could someone post that as a comment?  it'd be interesting to see if/how he responds.

Atheist Statists always make me laugh. Their inner Theist always comes out in their politics.

It was the following that really had me wondering, I mean, where does this 'dangerous children' imagery come from?  He seems to have really hit the nail on the head in this statement even if he isn't aware of it... 

Sam Harris:

Why do we have laws in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All laws are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else men with guns will arrive at your door and take you away to prison.

Craig:

It was the following that really had me wondering, I mean, where does this 'dangerous children' imagery come from?  He seems to have really hit the nail on the head in this statement even if he isn't aware of it... 

Sam Harris:

Why do we have laws in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All laws are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else men with guns will arrive at your door and take you away to prison.

No, he's just jealous of their youth and vigour and wants their souls, but he can't say that on a blog.

Craig:

It was the following that really had me wondering, I mean, where does this 'dangerous children' imagery come from?  He seems to have really hit the nail on the head in this statement even if he isn't aware of it... 

Sam Harris:

Why do we have laws in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All laws are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else men with guns will arrive at your door and take you away to prison.

It comes from trauma. Years of suppression, erasure, and abuse of the child by cold, or brutal parents leaves the resulting adult filled to overflowing with the unexpressed rage of that child. The men with guns are every bit as much "dangerous children" as the man being taken away by them. We live in an entire society of "dangerous children". This is why the United States government is dropping bombs on brown people in foreign countries. 

The *only* way out, is peaceful parenting. And that starts here, in this community. Nobody else, that I know of, has the strength or the self-awareness to even consider it, let alone succeed.

 EDIT:

P.S. I offered this, in an email:

Sent: 2011 08 26

Re: "How To Lose Readers"

Mr. Harris,

I enjoyed reading your article. I would like to offer one bit of humble insight, if you're interested...

In your article, you are quoted as saying this:

"Why do we have laws in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All laws are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else men with guns will arrive at your door and take you away to prison."

What struck me as perplexing about this, is that I couldn't quite understand how the men with guns were not, themselves, also "dangerous children". Perhaps the most dangerous kind, too. Because they have the guns - and an implicit moral authority (whether truly justified or not) - to use them as they see fit. 

The analogy of "dangerous children" is actually a pretty good one, when you look at the body of knowledge in medical science and child psychology. Child-rearing (at least in the United States) is very often brutal, and severely destructive to a child's psyche. Is it any wonder, that years of  suppression, erasure, and even at times abuse, by cold, or overbearing, or even aggressive parents, should leave the resulting adult from that process full to the brim with the unexpressed rage of the original helpless child? 

Seems to me, what we need is a lot more love for children, and what we'll get out of it is a lot less "necessary" laws.

Anyway, I hope this helps.

Regards,

Greg.

I don't expect a response, and I'm dubious that he'll even see the letter, let alone consciously realize what I'm suggesting, but as a thinking man, and someone who claims to be in search of the truth, I had to at least try to point it out.

Thanks Greg for your response and for making your email to Sam available, I sure hope that he'll at least see it. 

I suppose part of my interest in pointing this out is due to the fact that it was Sam Harris who is responsible for my becoming an Atheist.

Having been inspired by this man in the past leaves me feeling pretty disappointed to read an article such as this!

It really is too bad....

Craig:

Thanks Greg for your response and for making your email to Sam available, I sure hope that he'll at least see it. 

I suppose part of my interest in pointing this out is due to the fact that it was Sam Harris who is responsible for my becoming an Atheist.

Having been inspired by this man in the past leaves me feeling pretty disappointed to read an article such as this!

It really is too bad....

I had similar feelings about Richard Dawkins (though he wasn't responsible for my atheism. I was). 

When we see those we admire - especially really intelligent, insightful, gentle people - insisting on clinging to beliefs we know to be false, it's pretty painful.

I feel that way about a couple of my brothers.

If people are selfish and shortsighted then... you should give them a whole bunch of guns to steal from people?

GregG:

It comes from trauma. Years of suppression, erasure, and abuse of the child by cold, or brutal parents leaves the resulting adult filled to overflowing with the unexpressed rage of that child. The men with guns are every bit as much "dangerous children" as the man being taken away by them.

Does the initiation of force not make a difference for you in this regard? It seems to me that trauma can produce 2 antagonistic kinds of angry children

GregG:

We live in an entire society of "dangerous children".<\p>

yeah, children who enjoy candy and sticking their tongue out and "children" who want candy and have sticks out.

GregG:

This is why the United States government is dropping bombs on brown people in foreign countries.

the US government does not drop any bombs, human beings drop bombs, because they are justified in doing so by people like Sam Harris and supported by a majority of "children with sticks out".

In a world where people will come to you with sticks to get your candy, you need to learn to stick your tongue out. Peaceful parenting does not mean teaching reverence for statists and "force initiators". 

Dear Sam Harris:

Why do we have Gods in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All Gods are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else the invisible deity in the sky will cast a thunderbolt at you and take you away to Hell.

I don't get it, these super smart guys like Sam cannot draw the most obvious, no-brainer parallels between religious thinking and Statist thinking.  Argh!

people with illusions are always frightened of children

nathanm:

Why do we have Gods in the first place? To prevent adults from behaving like dangerous children. All Gods are coercive and take the following form: do this, and don’t do that, or else. Or else what? Or else the invisible deity in the sky will cast a thunderbolt at you and take you away to Hell.

I don't get it, these super smart guys like Sam cannot draw the most obvious, no-brainer parallels between religious thinking and Statist thinking.  Argh!

It all comes back to the family. 

It also seems like there's a great deal of envy here.  The envy and hatred of rich people.  You look at your lot in life and then you look at the big wigs and you get all pissed off because of the huge contrast.  Those assholes, they've got "infinite" money!  Fuckin' tax the shit out of them, Aaarrrgh!!  I don't know exactly how I was able to let this go…and it's something I surely felt strongly for a long time, but when I stopped caring about that crap it was a relief.  Rich people exist, it's okay, don't get bent out of shape over it.  Warren Buffet doesn't have his hand in my pocket, the IRS does.  Focus the hate on the IRS.

I thought that people stopped being liberals when they started making money, how come these big wig pundits with their lectures and bestselling books are not in bed with the rich crowd yet?