Ward Dragon said:
“I'm looking at it from a US perspective, so it might be different from what you've experienced in Poland. I'd generally agree that the government tends to mess things up by over-regulating. However I do believe some basic regulations are necessary, especially where it concerns public health.
For example it's normal here for vaccinations to be required for public school students (although parents can sign forms to exempt their children from the vaccinations due to religious beliefs). Health care workers need to be vaccinated against diseases as well because if they get infected they could spread it to their patients. And I think porn actors need to be tested on a regular basis as well (assuming that the Law & Order TV show didn't lie to me ). So if prostitution was legalized here, I don't think there's anything wrong with putting similar requirements for public safety's sake.”
Little off topic
:
It used to be the same here, but recently our parliament passed a law that lets the Main sanitary inspector declare an epidemic and all citizens will be required to vaccinate themselves (children and adults, and the doctors are authorized to use force if necessary without a court order). To push things even more the definition of an infectious diseases (which are the main targets of this law) was changed so that a normal flu can be used to issue an alert (I’m just curious how much money was passed under the table from pharmaceutical companies to pass this law). The bill also gives sanitary inspectors supreme authority during an epidemic ( or an investigation ) and they will not be accountable before the citizens or the government.
Back to the subject:
The health issue would probably regulate itself. As a customer whenever you want a service done you check the credentials of a company you want to hire to make sure you will be satisfied. The same thing would apply to prostitution. If a person would want to visit a brothel, then it’s in that persons best interest to ask if the employees have medical checkups (unless he/she doesn’t care about getting an STD in which case he/she is at fault). When the owner sees that there is a demand he/she will comply, because refusal to meet the demand would send the customers to competition or to lose interest in the service altogether (either way there is a loss of money involved). If the government would regulate the health issue there would be a lot of subjective lines that would have to be drown, for example: how often is the checkup needed, what kind of medical services would the checkup contain, where would it be done, and there would have to be someone who would check if the requirements are met. The more regulations are placed, the more likely corruption will occur and it’s basically undermining the reason those laws were established in the first place. Even if the rules turn out to be good they still are arbitrary. As an example I’m going to use a (sorry for so much examples from Poland, but this country is full of absurdity when it comes to law and regulations
maybe that’s why I like Monty Python’s Flying Circus so much
) law passed in the European parliament that requires every fuel distributor (as in the thing that you pour fuel from , don’t have an idea how it is called in English
) to have additional layers for protection. Safety is good , but the cost of those layers will put a lot of small gas station owners out of business. I’m not that old (22), but I don’t remember ever hearing about an explosion on a gas station (aside from movies), so while the law may be a good one, is it really necessary ?
“road to hell is paved with good intentions”
Ward Dragon said:
“And as far as other regulations go, I think it would be safer for everyone if brothels became legal but not pimping people on streets and alleys, or anything shady like that. I still don't think the prostitutes themselves should be charged with anything, but I hate pimps who take advantage of people and are often abusive and prey on people who can't go to the police for help. That's why I think prostitutes shouldn't be charged for prostitution, so that they can go to the police without fear of being imprisoned for things that they were probably coerced into doing.”
And those issues are already regulated by law (assault, harassment, threats etc…) . If prostitution is legalized then there is no reason for the prostitutes not to report abuse or any violence towards them to the authorities (unless those authorities would be really incompetent, but that would be a problem on its own…).
KnightofPhoenix:
Good article (a little short though
), but i think you missed few issues that i personally have with democracy (probably because you didn’t want to go so much into details). For me democracy is not as much an empowerment of the people as it is an illusion of choice coupled with lack of responsibility. People are afraid to speak their minds thanks to political correctness and eat up everything they are told by the media. I don’t have a problem that tv channels are biased (unless they are public). The problem in my eyes is that people don’t know that the news/tv shows they are watching are biased. Most people believe everything they see on the news and are too lazy to research alternative sources to come to their own conclusion on the subject and these are the people that vote. So if the people are fed false or biased information, then who is the one truly in charge? Polls that are shown during elections are a perfect example of this. Few people realize that the outcome of a poll is dependent on whoever ordered it (and even if they do, most are inclined to believe it if the outcome is favorable towards their preferred party/candidate while dismissing the ones conducted by the opposition), and they vote for the main candidates to “make their vote count”. As for the responsibility: when a politician makes a decision that turns out to be a complete failure ,who will be responsible for it? The politician for screwing up (does his punishment consist only of not getting reelected or will he be facing a trial), or his voters because they choose him (how do we even make them accountable)? Democracy allows to cast blame on the voters which actually helps the establishment to a certain degree (Divide et impera). Republicans vs Democrats is a prime example of this. When the society is divided and busy arguing it’s easier to pass legislation that otherwise would raise serious questions (NDAA, anyone?).
I’m more in favor of liberal authoritarianism, but I’m not delusional. Realistically the guy in charge could be a complete idiot that will destroy the country economically or with civil wars.
The best solution I see is the Enlightened despotism taking control via coups d'état . While in power the Enlightened despot should write down a constitution for a liberal country that is based on personal freedom (negative liberty) and free market. The said constitution should also be safeguarded against any attempts to override it by a potential future parliament (thus creating a Republic instead of a Democracy). The law in such a country should be clear and simple (the more complicated the law , the more loopholes will be created) and based on justice and equality of every person (no social justice crap). After the foundations of a country would be set, the time would come for positive liberty. The enlightened despot would clear office and set up the first election. The elected officials would be running the country ,but they would have to abide the constitution (in Poland the constitution is called the most important law bill in the country which is laughable, because nobody seems to give a fuck about anything that’s written in there…) and would not have the authority to change it. Still there would be a chance that the country would drift away from being a Republic. In the end the only sure safeguard is the hope that people will appreciate freedom and fight for it, if needed.
Fat chance of that happening, but a man can dream
And about the military:
Don’t be delusional. The primary function is to defend the interests (can’t find a better word) of the country. That said , it’s not like there are no heroes in the armies (there are) or that an army wouldn’t protect its country ( staying independent is usually in a countries best interest ). The military and the police are also an important mechanism of oppression. In a country that has harsh gun laws the last thing is really evident (as they are the only ones that have easy access to weapons). Maybe I’m just paranoid, but when taxes are being raised , ridiculous regulations arise, the law is inefficient and constantly abused by corrupted judges and politicians and only the guys that wear uniforms are getting raises or are keeping their privileges (except for Firemen who coincidentally aren’t issued guns…) things start to look a little obvious.
Cheers
