News What is the function of the state?

[Burnsys]

4 pages in and no one has posted this?:

The topic is: " What is the function of the state? " and not " What should be the function of the state? "


Edit: had you check the new editing module here in PF? it's great!

 

[Gokul43201]

The 'function of the state' is what the state should do, not what it does.

 

[russ_watters]

So... what if it is doing what it should do? I'm not being coy here, I honestly can't see why you don't consider that relevant.

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

The 'function of the state' is what the state should do, not what it does.

If you're talkin about what the state should do, then you're talking about morals. You first make a normative claim like

...establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity...

And provide reasons for all of them. They all sound good, but when you get really deep into it, they start to conflict with each other, and you realize it can't fully be done. For example, how do you ensure common defense and secure the blessings of liberty when you have to issue a draft? There are a lot of compromises that have to be made every once and a while to those standards, but overall those standards can be met with a high percent yield.

If you're talkin about what the state is doing, then you don't have to make a normative claim, but simply report on the facts. There is no place for morals and justice when you speak of what the state is doing, because it's simply a report. If you want to start exploring why the state is "doing something wrong" then you must refer to your own sense of morals and justice to do so.

So if you want to speak of what the function is in a way that simply reports facts, then you can't judge it. If you want to speak of the function of the state in a way that it ought to be, then you can judge it and suggest improvements that help achieve your ideas of morals and justice. All I'm saying is that this is semantics, and we've been talking about both the whole time. I'm willing to bet that we all want to talk about both rather than one or the other.

 

[Skyhunter]

So... what if it is doing what it should do? I'm not being coy here, I honestly can't see why you don't consider that relevant.

I think his argument is that the State is not performing those functions.

Those are the stated purposes of our establishment of a State, but not necessarily the States realized function.

[edit] However, I don't see how that is irrelevant to the topic either. [/edit]

 

[The Smoking Man]

Why won't the people allow it? exactly?

It's not in their nature.

What do you know of personality theory in business?

What do you know of S&M?

Do you think there is any way that people like Bill Gates can be convinced to not be as he is? Napoleon? Hitler? Moussolini?

What is peer pressure? What is 'bullying'?

How do you psycologically groom all of humanity to live in peace in an anarchic society given the vast difference in mentality. The first act of violence or desire will bring about the catalyst for the establishment of a world order consisting of rules and eventually laws.

It's "Human Nature".

The Human Animal, becaue of thought and reason, is the only animal to defy the concept of 'survival of the fittest' because of our intellect. Thought is our blessing and our curse.

It can be best summed up in the statement ... 'No man is an Island'.

 

[Smurf]

Are you going to make an argument or just ask questions?

 

[The Smoking Man]

Are you going to make an argument or just ask questions?

The best argument is that ther has not ever been a period in history when Anarchy ruled anywhere on earth.

Tell you what ... you point out all the successful incidents or how you forsee it happening.

I'll sit over here and get ready to poke holes.

 

[Art]

Are you going to make an argument or just ask questions?

Out of interest Smurf I have a few questions. I'd like to know your opinions on the following. Do you support;

a) the idea of having a free national health service?
b) free / subsidised education?
c) welfare support for the unemployed?
d) welfare support for the sick and old?
e) public transport?

 

[Smurf]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=804187#post804187

 

[jimmie]

4 pages in and no one has posted this?:
Quote:
...establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity...

I too believe that is what the state SHOULD be.

So, do you believe there should be more than one state?

 

[Skyhunter]

I too believe that is what the state SHOULD be.
So, do you believe there should be more than one state?

Not if it is to be truly sovereign. Sovereignty of State is an illusion, as long as there is another State to challenge it's sovereignty.

 

[jimmie]

Not if it is to be truly sovereign. Sovereignty of State is an illusion, as long as there is another State to challenge it's sovereignty.

That was my point: should there be ONLY one state?

 

[devil-fire]

4 pages in and no one has posted this?: "...establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity... "

this is the nuts and bolts of a democracy but i think it leaves out any kind of dictatorship.

 

[russ_watters]

this is the nuts and bolts of a democracy but i think it leaves out any kind of dictatorship.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying that we should include the functions of a dictatorship? The way I see it, the functions of the state should be laid out first, then the system of government designed around those functions to carry them out to the best extent possible.

 

[The Smoking Man]

That was my point: should there be ONLY one state?

Sure ... then we'll only have 'civil' wars.

 

[The Smoking Man]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying that we should include the functions of a dictatorship? The way I see it, the functions of the state should be laid out first, then the system of government designed around those functions to carry them out to the best extent possible.

Hmmm ... "the system of government designed around those functions to carry them out to the best extent possible."

You mean until the population or the government figure out how to circumvent the 'plan'?

Even the best plan put forward so far has allowed for malnourished children and abuse of power... The USA.

When you get the largest corporations and highest earners getting refunds while the middle class 'foots the bill', you can't say it is working as intended.

I mean ... in some cases it is blatantly obvious ... Halliburton gets done for criminal overbilling the government on the one hand and then gets a tax refund from the other!?

In China, everybody has figured out how to beat the system.

Until Klaatu arrives and stands behind any government that is put into power threatening to blow their heads off if he sees anything suspicious, this is going to be 'business as usual' on planet earth.

 

[Smasherman]

Government is a lot like the Italian mafia: the local mob boss protects you from other mob bosses in exchange for a small fee. If you refuse to pay, not only does the protection cease, but he's probably going to attack you himself. They've got a really nice racket going if you ask me.

That's my older brother's opinion of government, too (US government, anyway). It's one of those metaphors (simile in this case) that seems nearly perfect.

 

[Smasherman]

Thanks, i write it myself, but i think someone should have said it before.

Awesome. I'll put your screen name and the PF url on my list.

 

[X-43D]

The state is a monopoly of coercion in a given territory. The necessity for distinct organs of administration, repression and assistance has its cause in the maintenance of class society. The state is the defender of the dominant class which is increasingly integrated into it.

Many political philosophies that are opposed to the existence of a government (such as anarchism and to a lesser extent Marxism, as well as others), emphasize the historical roots of governments - the fact that governments, along with private property, originated from the authority of warlords and despots who took, by force land as their own (and began exercising authority over the people living on that land). Thus, it is sometimes argued that governments exist to enforce the will of the strong and oppress the weak, maintaining and protecting the privilege of a ruling class. It states that the government emerged when all the people of an area were brought under the authority of one person or group.

http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secB2.html

 

[russ_watters]

(re-opened after discussion with the other mods...)