Forum Index » Chaff » Ask an Anarchist


Display Avatars Sort By:
Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 06:37:23 MDT Print View

Thread moved from: "Harvard proves gun control advocates wrong" since it became a discussion of anarchy/voluntaryism.

My explanation of anarchy/voluntaryism is long winded but that’s because so many of us have been brainwashed by our communities, the state and the state schools that we don’t know what freedom is anymore. Our morality has been corrupted by having two classes of men, those who can commit aggression and those who cannot. So unfortunately, explaining what freedom and liberty are is not a short conversation since I must break through layers of unconscious propaganda to help you understand and even then you may not.

The founding principles of anarchy/voluntaryism are: you own yourself, the zero aggression principle and property rights.

Two podcasts to help you understand what liberty is:
http://www.badquaker.com/archives/2701
http://www.badquaker.com/archives/1729

The zero aggression principle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

Voluntaryism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntaryism

As a result of you owning yourself, you own the fruit of your labor thus any person or criminal gang(government) who comes to take your money without your consent is claiming to own you and is initiating force against you. Anarchists believe it is ok to use force in defense of yourself or your rightfully gained property, but not to INITIATE force against peaceful people. That’s the big difference between anarchy and statism, statists believe it is ok to INITIATE force against others because 51% of the VOTERS(not even 51% of the population) said so.

We voluntaryists/anarchists believe it is ALWAYS wrong to use force or aggression to get what you want. We have identified the main problem with the world, the misplaced belief in authority. You see, when I go to my neighbors house and demand a portion of his income, he will laugh and ask me to leave, should I persist he will rightfully defend his property. Yet if a man in a suit from the monopoly gang goes to his house and demands a portion of his income, he must oblige that man and give over whatever he demands. Another example; it is seen as perfectly acceptable for swat teams to go around kicking down peoples doors because they are the “authority” but what if I got a group of friends together and we put on shiny badges we made up, does that give us the right to go around kicking in people’s doors who might have drugs? The problem with the world today is the believe in authority, consider all the soldiers who were “just following orders”.

Anarchists do not believe in worshiping the state. Statism is a religion which worships flags, human sacrifice(soldiers dying for the state and innocents being killed in the process), aggression and violence. We do not need presidents or rulers, if you think you need someone to rule and dominate your existence that is your choice and do not force us to be a part of it. The morality of any system can be measured by your ability to opt-out of it.

Consider that in our current system, in the “land of the free” no one can actually own land. If you have to pay property taxes on something you “own” and those who you pay can take your land for not paying, then you DO NOT own it. They own you and they own your land.

Anarchists/voluntaryists believe that we own ourselves. The state also claims to own your body by using force against you for putting things which the gang/collective disapproves of into it and claiming to own a portion of your labor(they are taking between 40-60% of our labor now when you add in direct taxes, taxes on goods, hidden taxes like taxes the companies who produce your products had to pay to make it are passed on to the consumer). Drug use is a victimless crime, the act of ingesting a substance harms no one else but the one ingesting it, as a result, the state initiates force against peaceful people who chose to alter their consciousness. By claiming the right to initiate force against you for doing what you will with your body, they are claiming they own your body.

Government was not created for the common good or to ensure order, it was created for the use of force. As such, it is funded through theft and its dictates which are called law but are not law are enforced at the barrel of a gun. Should you disobey one of the hundreds of thousands of laws they claim the right to force upon you, you will first be threatened, should you resist you will be caged, should you resist caging you will be killed. Government is nothing more than force.

As a contrast, statists have NO principles. They say the believe in equality, yet they believe in two classes of men, those from the government who can essentially do whatever they want-and are immune from the moral consequences of their actions because of their various legal immunities and they are part of a “collective” and thus not an individual-and the rest of us who must submit to them. Statists claim to believe in freedom, yet they violate its fundamental nature by forcing their will on others and violating their property rights to fund it, they don’t believe in the axiom: “do what you will so long as you don’t harm anyone else or their property”. Statists want to use the gun of the state to force their morality on others for example; the drug war, illegal prostitution, illegal gambling, smoking bans, speeding tickets, owning guns, any initiation of force is immoral.

Voluntaryists/anarchists believe in a free market. If you want to start a business, start one, you don’t need “permission” from “authority” to start a business. Just do it, as long as you don’t violate someone else’s rights. Under the current system you have to ask permission from the master to go fishing, drive a car, own a house, own a gun, start a business, basically everything. That is not freedom, that is slavery. Permitting and regulation are ways that big corporations can prevent little guys from competing with them. Corporations are actually legal constructs of the state, they derive their power from the state and they would not have the kind of power they have now in a free society as they would be unable to use the force of the state to shut out their competition and gain unfair advantages.

Because we believe in a free market, we believe the market can provide all the services people want that the state currently provides. For example; statists always say, “but who will build the roads?” Answer; people will. If there is a need for something, the market will provide it, entrepreneurs and inventors will make it so. The market puts people in space and makes iphones, surely it can find a way to provide roads without the use of force. The same could be said for security services. Security could be provided for through voluntary means, such as security insurance. Dispute resolution companies(private arbitration) would work to resolve disputes among people and businesses as they do now. The difference between the statist society and the free society is that the security companies, road builders, etc actually have an incentive to provide a good product and service because people actually can withdrawl their support. We have an abusive police force now because it is a MONOPOLY. We all learned that monopolies are bad and provide bad service and even kill people in the case of the police because they are immune from prosecution(for the most part) and have no incentive to do a good job since we are FORCED to pay for them. If we could bankrupt them by not paying their salary and they had to compete for our business against other security forces, the drug war would end, so would swat raids and all the other abuses of police because the market would incentivize them to give the people what they want or go out of business. In regard to law and order or any other service that government does a crappy job of providing now, if there is a demand for it, it will be provided for by the market and done so voluntaryily. In Detroit, private police are protecting the people much better than police ever did and they are doing it without initiating force against people. They receive payments from willing customers and are so successful they are able to protect the poor people for free. They just protect life and property, they are not going around drug busting people so they can get more fedgov money.

The voluntaryist knows that the force of government trying to centrally plan things is contrary to human action and the human will. Central planning just does not work, spontaneous order works and the market works. "The state is based on socialism and will eventually collapse, it is the worlds longest running ponzi scheme." -Ben Stone

Governments provide nothing that they didn't steal from someone else first. Stealing is immoral, therefore government is immoral.

“BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?!?!?!” answered:
http://www.badquaker.com/archives/2711

In a voluntary society, if you wanted to start a socialist/communist/whatever society with other people that would be fine, go ahead have your experiment as long as noone is FORCED to be a part of it and people who don’t want to participate are left alone-their property rights un-violated. Of course socialism/communism would fail since it has no price mechanism as history has demonstrated, but you may have your experiment anyway. In a voluntary society you can do whatever you want so long as you don’t commit aggression against another. Again, the main points to remember are that you own yourself(and all the results of this realization), property rights and the zero-aggression principle.

It should be noted that anarchy/voluntaryism IS NOT A SYSTEM. There is no anarchy president or voluntary ruler. We do not believe in systems, we believe in freedom, liberty and free markets. We believe that systems are unnecessary and that the market/nature/god(whatever you want to call it) will provide everything we need and do so more efficiently than any government ever could and most importantly without using force, fraud, coercion or violence.

We are all slaves now, just because you think your free doesn’t mean you are. There is no such thing as half-free, your either free or you’re a slave and we are most definitely slaves.

Here is a good essay on what anarchy is:
http://www.badquaker.com/archives/2698

Essentialy all anarchists/voluntaryists are saying is, lets do what we learned in kindergarden. Lets not steal, lets not threaten, lets not hit each other. Somehow all of that applies to us as individuals but not the collective state.

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 07:11:08 MDT.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Anarchy as a sustainable methodology for everyone on the globe. on 08/29/2013 06:48:06 MDT Print View

Podcasts and Wikipedia

And those who don't play well with others

Wait for it...

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Quotes on 08/29/2013 07:09:17 MDT Print View

"A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years."
-Lysander Spooner

"It is curious that people tend to regard governmet as a quasi divine selfless santa cluas organization, government was constructed neither for ability nor the exercise of loving care. Governmnet was built for the use of force." -Murray Rothbard

“Every man has freedom to do all that he wills provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man.” –Herbert Spencer

“The state never intentionally confronts a mans senses intellectual or moral, but only his body-his senses, it is not armed with superior wit or honesty but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced, I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.” – Henry David Thoreau

"If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can, and will, hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists."
-Lysander Spooner

"If taxation without consent is robbery, the United States government has never had, has not now, and is never likely to have, a single honest dollar in its treasury. If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized."
Lysander Spooner

"If history could teach us anything, it would be that private property is inextricably linked with civilization."
Ludwig von Mises

"Government means always coercion and compulsion and is by necesseity the opposite of liberty." -Ludwig Von Mises

"Manufacturing and commercial monopolies owe their origin not to a tendency imminent in a capitalist economy but to governmental interventionist policy directed against free trade and laissez faire."
Ludwig von Mises

"If you wish to know how libertarians regard the State and any of its acts, simply think of the State as a criminal band, and all of the libertarian attitudes will logically fall into place."
Murray Rothbard

"Libertarians regard the state as the Supreme, the eternal, the best organized aggressor against the persons and property of the mass of the public. All states everywhere, whether democratic, dictatorial, or monarchical, whether red, white, blue or brown."
Murray Rothbard

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Re: Anarchy as a sustainable methodology for everyone on the globe. on 08/29/2013 07:10:25 MDT Print View

Playing well with others means stealing and using force?

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Discounting on 08/29/2013 07:13:42 MDT Print View

What is your beef with podcasts and wikipedia? Bad Quaker is the learned professor of the liberty movement-like a Jeffery Tucker for example. Whats your problem with wiki pedia?

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 07:18:26 MDT.

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Re: Anarchy as a sustainable methodology for everyone on the globe. on 08/29/2013 07:16:12 MDT Print View

Ike.
You will be crucified.

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
kat on 08/29/2013 07:20:26 MDT Print View

Bring it on. They will say corporations(government legal creations) will take over, the roads will not get built,chaos will ensue(nevermind the fact that government has killed hundreds of millions of people-democide and is currently getting ready to kill more in syra, i call that chaos), they will say we will have no law(yet government is not bound to its own laws, truly we are living in a lawless society RIGHT NOW), they will say the poor will not be fed. What other fallacious things can they say? I've heard them all before.let them

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 07:35:41 MDT.

spelt !
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
let them stay away on 08/29/2013 08:22:19 MDT Print View

I am only here to point out to any unfortunate souls who clicked on this thread that the strain of anarchism being described here is not the only one, a point that may be obscured by the OP's evangelizing for his particular brand.

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Strains on 08/29/2013 08:34:17 MDT Print View

Any consistent anarchist philosophy must have as its foundation the rejection of the initiation of force. Of course there is anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-socialism, anarchi-primitivism, but they must have as their foundation the rejection of the initiation of force(the state) otherwise they are not anarchism in my opinion. As i said before, if you want to VOLUNTARILY form a socialist community and voluntarily fund it, thats fine. But people who live in your geographic region who do not agree with you, you cannot take their property and force them into your system that is not anarchy that is slavery. It would be more accurate to call me a voluntaryist-someone who believes that all human interaction should be voluntary than an anarchist, even though essentially they are the same.

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 08:54:50 MDT.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 08:55:00 MDT Print View

Theoretically, if we had anarchy like you defined, everything would be great

Similarly, communism is theoretically utopian - each person produces what they can and takes what they need

In reality, given that people are people, your system will never work

For one, if you think that you can defend yourself with your guns, you're delusional. Take Waco Texas as an example. Or the Oklahoma City bomber.

For another, you produce nothing by yourself. And your waste damages other people. We are more productive banding together. Without government, we'de have... anarchy : )

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Re: Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 09:16:03 MDT Print View

"Similarly, communism is theoretically utopian - each person produces what they can and takes what they need"

I find the initiation of force hardly utopian. Communism is an economic disaster and not fixable.

"In reality, given that people are people, your system will never work"

Given that people are people, they should all be equal. Noone should have a badge that grants them extra rights or the ability to scribble words on paper and use guns to force their will on others. A system which gives god-like power to one group is exactly why we cannot have a state.

"For one, if you think that you can defend yourself with your guns, you're delusional. Take Waco Texas as an example. Or the Oklahoma City bomber."

I never said i could defend myself from a state. I never said i wanted to use aggression, everything i said was against the initiation of force. I don't see how the oklahoma city bomber has anything to do with defending yourself. Waco is proof that the government is a criminal gang, even if it was true the leader of that group may have harmed people(which i do not believe), it would not justify the slaughter of innocents. Noone is advocating a violent revolution here. Besides, as an individualist i can only speak for myself not other voluntaryists/anarchists. I would say that violent revolution WILL NEVER work and even if you threw out one gang of thugs and replaced them with another, the power would corrupt the new gang as well and we would be back where we started. A peaceful revolution of the ideas of freedom and liberty that REDUCES THE DEMAND FOR A STATE is what is needed. When the demand for the state is gone, people will simply ignore it and stop funding it until it dies. The state maintains the demand for itself by monopolozing certain industries like roads, fire protection or security. It then brainwashes children in schools to believe only the state could provide these services and it crushes their creativity. Once people see that the market can provide all the services government provides-better, more efficiently, cheaper and at a higher quality, the demand for the state will cease. But that is not allowed to happen, If i wanted to start my own police force to compete against the monopoly gang, i would be shut down.

"For another, you produce nothing by yourself."

I dont understand how you can say i produce nothing by myself? I create value for my employer every day i show up and seek to improve efficiency and productivity. Lots of people produce lots of things, i dont see how you can say individuals cannot produce something for themselves.

"And your waste damages other people."

My waste damages others? Thats why we have trash disposal services which could be done just fine by private companies, we don't need a monopoly of violence to take the trash out.

"We are more productive banding together."

I have no problem with that, we can voluntarily band together. As long as I am not forced to band together, there is no issue. Consider Kroger, people voluntarily band together to bring you food from all around the world and it works. No one is aggressed against, no one's property violated. Voluntarily, people can band together to do amazing things-like space travel and cellular technology, we don't need force to create prosperity.

"Without government, we'de have... anarchy : )"

You've been taught that anarchy is chaos, but in fact government is chaos. Who started all the wars? Who killed all the victims of war? Who is banging the war drums now as we speak? When some people have the ability to create law, they create more and more laws, they criminalize their opposition and they dominate. They do not obey their own laws. They murder, steal, rape and pillage other countries because some of the voting population believes they have the legitimate authority to do so. Criminal gangs are illegitimate no matter their uniform. What if los zetas showed up on your block and said you owe them money and everyone else on your block owes them money for this or that service. People would fight back. The reason people dont fight back against the state is because they believe it to be legitimate, for that to change, the state must be stripped of legitimacy. That stripping is happening now at a very fast rate and will continue into the future thanks to the free flow of information called the internet. Government is lawless, it does what it will when it wills. When it gets caught doing something wrong and gets held accountable(very rare since it investigates itself and grants itself immunities), then it reimburses the victim with stolen money. There is no accountability in government. With government you have created a group of people, set apart from everyone else who can steal, kill, use force at will and enslave others. If i as an individual went around doing what government does, i'd be elminated pretty quickly.


statism

as

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 09:34:48 MDT.

spelt !
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
Re: Re: Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 09:47:13 MDT Print View

Ike, I have anarchist sympathies but frankly you are coming off as a loony toon. What are you hoping to achieve here?

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 10:01:14 MDT Print View

"Communism is an economic disaster and not fixable."

Take religious or "hippy" communes. Many work quite well, at least for a while. People produce what they can and take what they need.

But, when you scale up, it doesn't work because people are greedy and lazy.

And the soviet union and communist China are not good because you are rewarded/punished by being loyal/disloyal to the party which has nothing to do with theoretical communism.


"I dont understand how you can say i produce nothing by myself? I create value for my employer every day i show up and seek to improve efficiency and productivity. Lots of people produce lots of things, i dont see how you can say individuals cannot produce something for themselves."

To simplify, let's say you were a homesteader. You produce food from dirt, air, and rain. Why are you entitled to that raw material? And you're profitting from millions of years of evolution - biological and learning how to do things. What entitles you to utilize that? Maybe someone else thinks you took their land or ideas. Is it just whoever has the biggest weapons gets to decide? Even libertarians think there should be a government to mediate disputes.


"My waste damages others? Thats why we have trash disposal services which could be done just fine by private companies, we don't need a monopoly of violence to take the trash out."

You produce CO2. There are so many billions of us that the total CO2 produced is becoming a problem. We need to band together and agree to quit removing the CO2 from the ground where it's sequestered. Your CO2, along with everyone else's, will result in flooding somebody in Bangladesh. That Bangladeshi can't take his gun and shoot everyone to get them to quit.


Most of your base ideas I agree with, like the government shouldn't make wars or prevent people from taking drugs or prohibit someone from owning a gun. But your prescription will never work.

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Accomplish on 08/29/2013 10:09:08 MDT Print View

As I see it, backpackers and long distance hikers have an independent streak to them-perhaps more than the average person. They are fertile ground, I'm walking around throwing handfuls of liberty seed because the time and place are right. The state is losing legitimacy faster than ever before, voluntarysists, libertarians(not the political variety), and anarchists are gaining ground. State media is collapsing and the alternative web based media is rising(freedom Feens, free talk live, Stefan molyneux, bad Quaker, and so many ior her voices). Now would seem the perfect time to spread seed as far as I can. The statists who are logical and honest with themselves will eventually be unable to continue to be statists due to the dissonance in their beliefs. I was not always an anarchist, first i was a religious statist(indoctrinated into it), then a small government republican, then a liberal, for a bit a socialist, now finally, with reason and critical thinking I have arrive at the moral and logically consistent position of anarchy/a voluntary society. If I can drop a few seeds here and there, they may not sprout at first but if the statist is honest, they will bother him/her overtime until they renounce their statism. The time is other, besides, I"be seen other anarchists, ancaps and voluntarysists on bpl before.

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 10:22:24 MDT Print View

To simplify, let's say you were a homesteader. You produce food from dirt, air, and rain. Why are you entitled to that raw material? And you're profitting from millions of years of evolution - biological and learning how to do things. What entitles you to utilize that? Maybe someone else thinks you took their land or ideas. Is it just whoever has the biggest weapons gets to decide? Even libertarians think there should be a government to mediate disputes.

libertarians who think there should be a government are not libertarians, they are minarchists. We don't need a government to settle disputes, thats what private property and dispute resolution organizations are for. If there is a demand for dispute resolution, the market will provide it.

I knew you were going to go the route of no-one owns anything and talk about air and minerals. I am entitled to what i mix my labor with. If there is un-owned land in the desert and I go there and install a water collection device and being setting up a house. I have mixed my labor with this previously unowned land and i now own it. IF as you say, an individual cannot own land, how can a collective? Can an individual delegate rights to a collective that the individual him/herself does not have? How does that magic work?

"You produce CO2. There are so many billions of us that the total CO2 produced is becoming a problem. We need to band together and agree to quit removing the CO2 from the ground where it's sequestered. Your CO2, along with everyone else's, will result in flooding somebody in Bangladesh. That Bangladeshi can't take his gun and shoot everyone to get them to quit."

So somehow breathing is a sin? The environmental movement is largely and anti-human anti-male movement, but i wont get into that. If you want to band together to remove CO2, maybe you can PERSUADE people with your knowledge to quit producing so much but using the state to FORCE people and then funding your force with stolen money is immoral and violent. Besides, i'm on the fence about this whole CO2 thing based on recent revelations in the scientific community, i'm loathe to believe anything from scientific authorities given the what we call science today is hardly science but more a competition for stolen government loot called grant money.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the state, and that's fine given as you are like most people in that regard. when I talk about the state using the gun and using force, I am not referring to individuals. If the mans property was damaged by say a factory next to his home, he could prove that in dispute resolution and it would be easy to do so. Proving that my CO2 thousands of miles away caused a flood in Bangladesh is impossible to prove and would never stand up to scrutiny in a dispute.

"Most of your base ideas I agree with, like the government shouldn't make wars or prevent people from taking drugs or prohibit someone from owning a gun. But your prescription will never work."

Over time as demand for government declines and if entrepreneurs and private folk were allowed to compete with government, you would see how it would work. Just because your creativity has been so stunted by the schools and those around you and you are unable to imagine a world where free people get things done without a government does not mean it is not possible. Human creativity is not limited by your imagination.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Accomplish on 08/29/2013 10:31:40 MDT Print View

"The state is losing legitimacy faster than ever before, voluntarysists, libertarians(not the political variety), and anarchists are gaining ground. State media is collapsing and the alternative web based media is rising..."

I think Huxley and Orwell better described the direction we're going

I think voluntarysists, libertarians(not the political variety), and anarchists are regarded as fringe and loony

But who knows, some ideas are regarded as loony but later become accepted. Like the idea that bacteria cause ulcers was crazy talk but has now become accepted. Or plate techtonics.

Yuri R
(Yazon) - F
Unfortunately for you on 08/29/2013 10:35:43 MDT Print View

You would need to invent a country in order for your principles to be true.

When you say that government can't take your money (i assume you are talking about taxes), don't forget that from the day when you were born - you, inside your mother, had to drive to a hospital on a nicely paved road. To a hospital that with or without insurance would not refuse to assist in labor, that you live in a land where your neighbor can't dump mercury out into your water supply just because he is bored... etc.

All of this requires money and people have agreed to participate in a system where they trade taxes/personal freedoms for a common sets of rules applied to everyone.

You don't have to follow those rules - you are welcome to live in a territory that has no such rules or to start your own country/movement. I just doubt you will find enough supporters. And it is not because your ideas are not appealing to some degree, but because they would not stand up to the human nature on a large scale. You would be right back to the same ideas of rule of majority as soon as people start to act on their less popular desires.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ask an Anarchist on 08/29/2013 10:41:41 MDT Print View

"So somehow breathing is a sin? ... maybe you can PERSUADE people with your knowledge to quit producing so much but using the state to FORCE people..."

No, removing CO2 from the ground and releasing it to the atmosphere is a sin.

But, let's say we all agree taking oil out of the ground and burning it produces CO2 which effects the planet as a whole.

An individual can burn oil and it won't make any difference - too small a quantitiy.

You have to get everyone to quit doing it.

You need a government to enforce this "with guns" or we'll slowly pollute the earth and eventually those people in Bangladesh (and Florida and Manhattan) will just have to move somewhere else and the increased hurricane intensity will wreak havok on many areas and all the timbered areas around where I live will become plains (or whatever the effect will be, we don't really know)

And the same principal applies to many other aspects of civilization

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
Re: Unfortunately for you on 08/29/2013 10:49:37 MDT Print View

"You would need to invent a country in order for your principles to be true."

No i dont, when people stop worshipping states and believing in authority, then my principles will be true.

"When you say that government can't take your money (i assume you are talking about taxes), don't forget that from the day when you were born - you, inside your mother, had to drive to a hospital on a nicely paved road. To a hospital that with or without insurance would not refuse to assist in labor, that you live in a land where your neighbor can't dump mercury out into your water supply just because he is bored... etc."

So i have no to drive on roads that i was stolen from to pay for, my mother was stolen from to pay for, her mother was stolen from to pay for and everything all my familiar relations connect to was stolen from to pay for?

I dont understand the second portion of your comment, You seem to be rambling. Property rights resolves pollution, its precisely because property rights have been so muttled in a statist society that pollution is a problem. People care for things they own, then things are not owned by individuals, they fall into disrepair and become trashy, this is called the tragedy of the commons. Thats why we have a massive plastic island the size of texas in the ocean.

"You don't have to follow those rules - you are welcome to live in a territory that has no such rules or to start your own country/movement. I just doubt you will find enough supporters. And it is not because your ideas are not appealing to some degree, but because they would not stand up to the human nature on a large scale. You would be right back to the same ideas of rule of majority as soon as people start to act on their less popular desires."

So essentially you are saying, if you dont like it, GET OUT and that is more an admission of intellectual defeat than an argument.

You don't know your a slave. Harriet Tubman said she cOuld have freed thousands more slaves if only they knew they were slaves. There are only two options, either you own yourself or someone else owns you-which is it?

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 11:24:45 MDT.

Ike Mouser
(isaac.mouser) - F
gubmint on 08/29/2013 10:53:37 MDT Print View

You need a government to enforce this "with guns" or we'll slowly pollute the earth and eventually those people in Bangladesh (and Florida and Manhattan) will just have to move somewhere else and the increased hurricane intensity will wreak havok on many areas and all the timbered areas around where I live will become plains (or whatever the effect will be, we don't really know)"

So just a little bit of evil is ok? Is it ok if i rob you "just a little bit", how about a punch in the nose-"not hard enough to break it" but just hard enough to make me feel better, is that ok? You are advocating evil. The idea that somehow government prevents pollution is laughable, governments are the largest polluters on the planet-any idea what kind of disasters war produces? Corporations pollute as well, but corporations are state-created entities that would not exist in a free market anyway, so their pollution is largely due to the government as well. The idea that government someone can clean pollution is laughable at best, government keeps most of the money it takes in to benefit itself and its friends. You are under the illusion that government exists to make the world a better place and help people, that is called delusion, the truth is that it exists to enrich itself and its benefactors. Even if you created an anti-pollution law, lets say you wrote it. That law would go through lots of burecratic nonsense before it ever got passed and would hardly resemble your intitial offering. Then it would be enforced not by you, but by people you've never met. See why this doesn't work?

Who are you to say that you know what's best for nature? Are you or a other central planners so smart as tO know how many spotted hairy butt owls or certain forests should exist? Why te hate for man? Is man not natural? Humans have survived being exterminated by the brutal force you call nature through technology, I appreciate this because I would not exist without it nor would you.

Did you know scientists developed the solution to C02 already? I remember reading about 80 or maybe 800 million dollar project that involved putting these devices in the ocean that would convert co2. That kind of money is nothing for governments, so why haven't they done it? Because its not about the environment, it's about domination and money. As long as you labor under the delusion that they care about you or anyone else you can never see the state for what it is.

Edited by isaac.mouser on 08/29/2013 11:12:36 MDT.