/lit/ - Literature

>>16315076

The state is necessary because of free will.

>>16315110
Morality is only possible because of free will, but if everyone acted in a moral manner there would be no need for a state to exist.

>>16315076
You missed the parts about fostering a common identity and common wealth, and facilitating trade, but sure, keeping law and order is important, too.

>>16315076
>instill the morality prerequisite
oh no no no blank slate bros

>>16315118
People create their own moralities.

>>16315076
The state isn't a tool or anti-barbarism machine like the liberalists claim it is. Government is the legalism/sovereign, Nation is the body and State is what those two create. Authority is merely the head of the national myth, which the state becomes the embodiment of. That's why a nation and a government can go to war with each other, while a state remains the espousal of their product; a cohesive national myth.

>>16315076
>level of authoritarianism inversely dependent of level of barbarism that exists in a given society
Inversely dependant would mean the less barbarism, the more authoritarianism.

The state enforces a social order that serves those in power and in control of the state. It has nothing to do with morality.

>>16315129
No, people act upon their own wills, and justify it afterwards. Morality in the sense of the categorical imperative, is dependent upon whether or not the moral action could be universalized with contradiction.

ie - Theft is immoral because if universalized would be impossible because it would invalidate property, making theft impossible.

>>16315179
Which is why the validity of the state rests solely on whether it elicits behavior from citizens which would ultimately lead to its redundancy.

>>16315076
>moral
>unnecessary
>stateless society
>authoritarianism
>barbarism
Meaningless words. Express yourself in concrete terms. Anyone can parrot pretty abstractions, and have completely different things in mind.

>>16315229
>Moral

Actions that, when universalized, don't lead to contradiction.

>unnecessary

Monopoly on the use of force(the state) is only necessary to check the amoral use of force within a society.

>stateless society

Fairly straightforward.

>authoritarianism

Primacy of the state's authority, power from above rather than from below.

>barbarism

Level of amoral behavior currently present in a society.

>>16315251
I didn't ask for definitions. You've just elaborated on your abstractions. They're as open to interpretation as before, and could be used by any speech writer to justify mostly any political agenda.

Any political position that makes heavy use of pleasant-sounding words over concrete notions is a scam.

the state has not originated as an enforcemenr of morality but simply as a tax extracting social structure
which allowed barbarian war lords to obtain resources from the actually productive farmers

>>16315076
Authoritarianism is in itself immoral. If you're on fire you don't douse yourself with gasoline to put it out.

>>16315076
I cant refute Plato (pbuh).

>>16315076
>>16315219
>tfw no Pitted Ware Culture gf

>>16315420
ok ragnar

>>16315076
>the primary function of the state should be to i
And why would “the state” want to dissolve itself?

>>16315466
OP is arguing for what the state ought to be, OP is not describing what the state was or what it currently is.

>>16315564
It wouldn't. But it would lack authority.

>>16315420
What is concrete to you?

I was writing out a long post to deal with the OP in depth, but found that this post >>16315081 is much more concise and offers the same conclusion.

>therefore the primary function of the state should be to instill the morality prerequisite for a stateless society

that's essentially the purpose of the vanguard state in Marxist thought

>>16316221
yeah and it's stupid

>a state is needed because there are lots of immoral people
>create a state in order to control people for their own good and the good of others
>give the state an enormous amount of power over everyone's lives
>it is impossible to simply prevent all immoral people from entering into the state solely to acquire power for its own sake
>some immoral people do just that
>corrupt and immoral people inevitably acquire enormous control over society
>tyranny

Somebody prove me wrong?

>>16316314
BASED

>>16315076
>if everyone was moral the state would be unnecessary
The premise is extremely vague. You just say "let X be an ethical system that will render the state unnecessary", but you don't say anything concrete about X. You (deliberately?) left it vague, which makes your argument impossible to discuss further, and irrefutable by design.

>>16315076
https://discord.gg/rdzBstp

>>16315076
Come back when you've actually thought for an hour about how your definition of morals would function in practical application. Hint: it doesn't.