/liberty/ - Liberty

>>79116

There used to be this thing called honor that even lowlifes had.

>>79136

Honor is dead, we live in the age of profit now.

the idea is that the robber dosnt particularly want to kill someone but they do want to steal from you

the fact that they even asked is proof enough, if they didnt care they would have just shot you

>>79160

It's easier to put a bullet in someone who's standing there with their hands up.

>>79161

False. Civilization does not only thrive when honor is maintained, it cannot exist without it. You cannot have an advanced, market-based society without the expectation that contracts are maintained, agreements are upheld. Do we have safe-guards in place against those without honor? Of course, be they courts, private security forces, or good old world-weary cynicism. But these are back-ups. By default we are not suspicious souls; we do not use these systems to replace our feelings of trust and loyalty, but to supplement them when they fail. To use an everyday example, do you know very many people that elect to get a prenuptial agreement, despite the many material advantages it holds? It's not just an uncommon thing in society, many actively shun it when they encounter such, because despite its seemingly rational benefits, the complete lack of trust that it implies is extremely unappealing to us.

>>79161

That's a lot of words you're putting in my mouth, bub.

>>79116

ANARCHO TYRANISM

The (((midia))) tells you to surrender and die because you know exacly why.

>>79162

Certainly it'd be easier to hit an unsuspecting target.

>>79163

Ok, you do make a good point, I can't disagree with that, but the word "honour" itself has lost all meaning, it was and still is just a concept subverted by the state as another method of manipulating people and using them to either be complacent or commit atrocities.

Like how being in the army is somehow "honourable" because you kill whenever and whoever you are told to and not the people you choose to, like in situations when you need to defend yourself, or, like how in the Soviet Union it was "honourable" when one guy snitched on a bunch of kulaks to the bolshevik authorities, despite the fact that these "kulaks" were his own father and brothers storing food so that they won't all starve to death in the winter.

>>79171

I was putting soy not words in your mouth, bub.

>>79203

>Like how being in the army is somehow "honourable" because you kill whenever and whoever you are told to and not the people you choose to

That's certainly what the US military has become of late, but that's not why we consider military service to be honorable. Servicemen are honored because we view them people who have chosen to put themselves at great personal risk in order to protect others. No, I'm not claiming that launching cruise missiles at goatfuckers in tents is even remotely like defense of your home. But that image of service in the defense of his country is what's keeping the "honor" moniker alive. But those in favor of interventionist warfare will lead people to believe that playing in the sandbox overseas is the same thing as defense, and as such is also worthy of "honor." But through this dishonesty the meaning of the term is perverted, and the interventionists acquire through that perversion a very robust shield against criticism of their plans.