Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

A thought about Law

rated by 0 users
This post has 3 Replies | 1 Follower

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,305
TelfordUS Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:45 AM

For every law that is passed by the State, it gains another reason to punish you and your personal endeavors. There is no rule nor law nor regulation that relies on pacifism or peace.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 257
Points 4,685

That is very much true, and people do not see this. The fallacy is that state law appeals to recursion ad infinitum: "there's a higher law that prevents unjust laws to be adopted". Even if justice were perfect (in the sense that laws are applied perfectly with no mistakes/interpretations), there is no way to prevent abuse.

This is why the idea of law (at least in the sense it is considered in today's states) goes contrary to freedom. It cannot rely on pacifism since monopoly on regulation implies aggression.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:57 AM

TelfordUS:
There is no rule nor law

It's chaos!

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 203
Points 5,305
TelfordUS replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 7:05 AM

Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu:

That is very much true, and people do not see this. The fallacy is that state law appeals to recursion ad infinitum: "there's a higher law that prevents unjust laws to be adopted". Even if justice were perfect (in the sense that laws are applied perfectly with no mistakes/interpretations), there is no way to prevent abuse.

This is why the idea of law (at least in the sense it is considered in today's states) goes contrary to freedom. It cannot rely on pacifism since monopoly on regulation implies aggression.

Right. Aggression kills constructive competition, the staple of a free and efficient market. Instead of playing "King of the Hill" with dominance in the market, the hill is completely taken over and governed, and laws are made to ensure the hill sees no other competition.

I don't know why I couldn't realize this before.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (4 items) | RSS