Fluery:For some reason though, I still have this idea in my mind of a very small government committed to only protecting it's citizens from violence.
Make sure it is small enough you can hire and fire it. Then you are talking...
GilesStratton:Are you purposefully missing the point?
No, I learned a trick from you, ignore the point and pretend that what I say ios the point....
GilesStratton:I'll issue my challenge again, what's the difference between Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Salazar?
In regard to living in a free society, nothing, they were all hostile to individual freedom
GilesStratton:Because we should really judge religion by the acts of religious people that violate the acts of their faith. That sounds fair.
Life is not fair Giles, why is it that you can say you are smarter than a person because of race, but the logical extrapolation of religious people's acts involved in politics cannot be used as example? Fact is, you cannot guarantee those people will not worm their way into your theocratic "free" society and cause the same issues this secular state has forced on the individuals...
GilesStratton:Juan, BP, Bawaa and every other ML Randroid on these forums.
So these people told you that religion should be abolished and you should not practice it in your own home?
GilesStratton:I seriously have to stop calling myself a libertarian, you hippy folk piss me off.
You should call yourself what you are Giles, and no, it is not a libertarian, anyone that reads anything out of your braincase should be able to see that plain enough...
Now to respect the wishes of LS, I am not talking about this here any longer, mail me, or not...
It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student
Harry Felker:You should call yourself what you are Giles, and no, it is not a libertarian, anyone that reads anything out of your braincase should be able to see that plain enough...
I know, I'm a conservative, not a libertarian.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
Are you close yet? I'd love to see the finished, polished product. If you're not, don't give up, this is definitely a noble plan!
Sage: I'm planning on making this into a full article, with intro, conclusion, short summaries, and a "Further Reading" section. I want this to be the short-version minarchist debunker. Rest assured, the minarchists will see this in the near future. But if you want to post it now, I don't think it matters.
I'm planning on making this into a full article, with intro, conclusion, short summaries, and a "Further Reading" section. I want this to be the short-version minarchist debunker. Rest assured, the minarchists will see this in the near future.
But if you want to post it now, I don't think it matters.
My previous post was to Sage, in response to this post ^^^
An alternative angle for those with the Hobbesean fear... you can approach it by asking them, "what creates civilization?"
"In regards to the Hobbesian fear, point out what makes civilization possible. The division of labor and property rights."
Thus, the more 'civilized' a society, the greater respect for the division of labor... and in particular, property rights.
Where is the state in this picture? No-where.
Ok, so what other positions are there that we can design a top 10 for?
Should come up with a list, and do another one of these.
- Social democrats / Socialists / marxists / Liberals?
- Conservatives ?
eh?
Conza88:Ok, so what other positions are there that we can design a top 10 for?
I think if you prove government wrong, the others are automatically wrong....
Harry Felker: Conza88:Ok, so what other positions are there that we can design a top 10 for? I think if you prove government wrong, the others are automatically wrong....
Yeah, but I mean like tailoring it to the individual... but yeah I see your point.
An environmentalism one or something might be helpful.
Conza88:An environmentalism one or something might be helpful.
Two words are all that is needed for environmentalists....
Environmentalists meaning just people who care about the environment, even for their own selfish reasons. That's just about everyone, and we have great arguments (in principle, usually not expounded) for such people to convince them that such needs will be much better served under anarchy.
Why anarchy fails
AJ: Environmentalists meaning just people who care about the environment, even for their own selfish reasons. That's just about everyone, and we have great arguments (in principle, usually not expounded) for such people to convince them that such needs will be much better served under anarchy.
I think Conza is speaking of the statist environmentalist....
For which my statement still stands....
Well, I personally suspect that statist environmentalists like Al Gore are probably not even actual environmentalists, just shameless power mongers.
revolutionist: liberty student: revolutionist:Unfortunately, their votes have the power to further enslave me or give me a bit more freedom. Then you are screwed. I have never heard of an ancap who accepts the authority of others to exercise power of others to his life and property. That is exactly what voting is. By voting and playing the political game, you are using the same mechanism the state gains authority from for your own ends. You are exercising democratic, majority power to the detriment of any minority that might oppose you. Not to mention that the entire election process and serving in government in the first place is a coercive business. You necessarily have to profit from state theft and violence. I just can't see how any kind of serious ancap can support a little stealing now for electoral success (and presumably more stealing later). It's completely an ends justify the means argument, which every libertarian rejects when he accepts the NAP. It's not that I recognize that authority, not by a longshot. I just don't want to get thrown in jail, so I comply. If I can vote for a more benevolent master, I will.
liberty student: revolutionist:Unfortunately, their votes have the power to further enslave me or give me a bit more freedom. Then you are screwed. I have never heard of an ancap who accepts the authority of others to exercise power of others to his life and property. That is exactly what voting is. By voting and playing the political game, you are using the same mechanism the state gains authority from for your own ends. You are exercising democratic, majority power to the detriment of any minority that might oppose you. Not to mention that the entire election process and serving in government in the first place is a coercive business. You necessarily have to profit from state theft and violence. I just can't see how any kind of serious ancap can support a little stealing now for electoral success (and presumably more stealing later). It's completely an ends justify the means argument, which every libertarian rejects when he accepts the NAP.
revolutionist:Unfortunately, their votes have the power to further enslave me or give me a bit more freedom.
Then you are screwed. I have never heard of an ancap who accepts the authority of others to exercise power of others to his life and property.
That is exactly what voting is. By voting and playing the political game, you are using the same mechanism the state gains authority from for your own ends. You are exercising democratic, majority power to the detriment of any minority that might oppose you. Not to mention that the entire election process and serving in government in the first place is a coercive business. You necessarily have to profit from state theft and violence.
I just can't see how any kind of serious ancap can support a little stealing now for electoral success (and presumably more stealing later). It's completely an ends justify the means argument, which every libertarian rejects when he accepts the NAP.
It's not that I recognize that authority, not by a longshot. I just don't want to get thrown in jail, so I comply. If I can vote for a more benevolent master, I will.
Sounds like you don't have a shred of dignity, virtue, or integrity. You're a moral coward, sir. You're just practicing intellectual masturbation. Please stop trying to help the cause for liberty, you're only hurting it.
Voting says, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
"Because that's all surrendering the power of your life, your choice, your individuality to things outside your control, to whether you can convince an indifferent people to make you more free. Because you're just chasing after other people. If you have to run around trying to convince people to vote for your guy, you aren't free! Because you're begging other people, "pleeaassse, let me be free!", "please, lower gas prices!", "please, let me keep all of my income, please don't tax it!" Phooey! That's sick and disgusting!"
* If I win, violence is used against me. * If I lose, violence is used against me. * If I don't vote, violence is used against me. * If I am prevented from voting like the black slaves were, violence is used against me.
You do not need a piece of paper or some politician to tell you that you are free. You are free by the very fact that you're a human being! Only YOU can make yourself free. It is within you to live a life of happiness, self-expression, to have all the beautiful and radiant things that you want.
Voting gives people no real choice unless they can vote 'none of the above'. [read 'None of the Above' by Sy Leon]
I view libertarianism as an ideal that demands the best of me, and through me, the best of my neighbors. It tells me that my only obligation in life is to not harm anybody else. It tells me that only I am morally responsible for my own actions, no one else. Libertarians must always be consistent with their own principles. Under this ideal, we must never give in to the temptation of compromise, we must never associate with the very system we find evil, but instead aim towards a nonviolent activism, a civil disobedient tactic, and we must continue the education of our friends, family, and schoolmates by setting the example.
By setting the example on how to live a free life, a life without fear or guilt or subjugation, we show our principles to be logically consistent. You show that you don't need some comical monkey in D.C. to rule your life. You may flub, you may act clumsily, but you must learn and grow, and show such an outpouring of love and peace towards our fellow man: empathy is key! Empathy will lead us down the path to courage and compassion. We must build long-term and genuine relationships where others trust us. We must lead not just from the mind, but from the heart, as well. Or how else do we empathize? Remember there's no such thing as a small act of kindness. Every act creates a ripple with no logical end. To never give up, never surrender. Not to let the dark of night fall over the light of day. Not while you yet live! Live and breath the libertarian dream and it will become reality! It may not be in your lifetime, but the effect you have on others will carry on. I am absolutely certain that if we stay consistent and set the example, that we can win the day. A wonderful and beautiful future awaits us, if we but remove the self-imposed shackles. It all starts with YOU, right now, today.
I guess this is radical optimism here.
You observe, but you do not see.
Bastiat's "The Law" (as a basis for political theory)
http://mises.org/daily/2060
Frank Chodorov's "Taxation is Robbery"
http://mises.org/daily/2500
Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience"
http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil.html
Gustave de Molinari, The Production of Security
http://mises.org/resources/2716
this guy is considered to be the first ever 'anarcho-capitalist', tho I am sure he would have balked at being called an 'anarchist'.. back then anarchy was associated with 'stateless socialism' of Godwin, Proudhon, and Bakunin. :D
THE DISCOURSE OF VOLUNTARY SERVITUDE, Etienne de la Boetie
http://mises.org/rothbard/boetie.pdf
(How an Economy grows and Why it Doesn't)
http://www.takelifeback.com/hegawid/
(Human Action Comics)
http://picasaweb.google.com/Lilburne2
Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson
http://jim.com/econ/
After much consideration, I submit the following essay for inclusion in the Top Ten (possibly replacing the Cuzán article):
The Obviousness of Anarchy (appears in the 2008 book Anarchism/Minarchism edited by Long and Machan)
It does not require the reader's acceptance of any of the following: ethics of any kind, praxeology, Austrian economics, the NAP, free markets, nor even PDAs or any other machinery of AnCap theory. It circumvents all of that to make the purest, most obvious argument for anarchy I have ever seen.