Anarchists and libertarians - Please click here

[LaDexter]

Yeah.... what a truly factual and logical basis to dump your ideology... to find out others who agree with you are not all up to your standards....

On the left, we have crack whores.... who vote Dem...

So ALL DEMS ARE CRACK WHORES.... or maybe just g5000 is...

 

[Brian Blackwell]

You are correct there is no provision for me citing moral reasons for breaking the law and getting let off the hook. Thus with each law I, like you must make a choice. We can agree or choose not to and face the consequences. Freedom has never been free of consequence.

The same goes at our work, which you will agree is a freely entered into situation. An example, when I was a young E3 in the Corps I was given what I felt was an unlawful order, so I refused to do it knowing that it could get me into trouble. The same holds true for the government, if there was a law that forced me to do something that went against my moral views I would then have to make a choice. So far I have no ran across that, but that is not to say it could not happen.

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

 

[kaz]

And they don't give a shit what other security firms think. They care what their customers think. Your view that companies wouldn't try to differentiate themselves to serve a market segment is wow ... massively stupid. And even more naive.

So are you moving out in 24 hours? You got the notice. Or are they going to kill you and your family?

A company is going to differentiate itself by preying on the customers of other security agencies? Really? And you believe those other agencies wouldn't feel threatened by such a business model?

Talk about being massively stupid and even more naive

Other companies don't give a shit about protecting you, Virginia

You obviously too fucking dumb to understand what I'm saying. They care about protecting their customers. If they stop coing that, they soon won't have any customers. You're believe that intelligent people are going to stand around with their thumbs up their ass will some security company converts to a criminal gang that preys on their customers is too stupid for words to describe.

You're a joke, little boy. Leftists on the board always inform me how rich they are. You can be anything you want on the internet. So whatever.

But you have no idea what companies would do for money. I do both professionally and personally.

I'm just laughing at you that you think companies will behave when rich companies and people are willing to pay them to not behave.

You're completely over your head. Here's your bottle. Or in your and oddballs case should I say bwattle?

There are plenty of wealthy people right now who would pay some security company from becoming a criminal gang. What's stopping them?

Well, on the subject at hand, your property rights are recognized and protected by government. Which was my point. It's one of the half dozen or so legitimate powers I listed for government.

I realize you can't detect a pattern between a duck, a goose and a swan, but again my standard was clear. I see the only legitimate powers of government where you can only have one of something. There can be only one property line between you and your neighbor. It can't be set between you and your neighbor or between your security companies

 

[kaz]

They aren't Christians, dumbass.

The shit you try to put over us is astounding.

They are more Christian than you are anarchist

Personal attacks are the only thing you got, douchebag.

From you???

 

[kaz]

I once thought I was libertarian. Then I went to a few meetings of the libertarians and thought they all sounded like goddamn morons. So, I figured it wasn't really rational to think that I was doing it correctly, and all of them were doing it wrong... so I decided I was not a libertarian, and that libertarianism is fucking dumb.

I tried, at least.

Nailed it!

I like leftists who say you don't agree with an ideology because you think they are horses asses rather than their ideas, then you vote for Democrats who are both horses asses and have no actual ideas ...

 

[g5000]

I once thought I was libertarian. Then I went to a few meetings of the libertarians and thought they all sounded like goddamn morons. So, I figured it wasn't really rational to think that I was doing it correctly, and all of them were doing it wrong... so I decided I was not a libertarian, and that libertarianism is fucking dumb.

I tried, at least.

Nailed it!

I like leftists who say you don't agree with an ideology because you think they are horses asses rather than their ideas, then you vote for Democrats who are both horses asses and have no actual ideas ...

Sadly for you, I have voted for one Democrat in my life, at the behest of William F. Buckley (who was a libertarian and is spinning in his grave at what assholes like you have done to the conservative movement).

 

[kaz]

I once thought I was libertarian. Then I went to a few meetings of the libertarians and thought they all sounded like goddamn morons. So, I figured it wasn't really rational to think that I was doing it correctly, and all of them were doing it wrong... so I decided I was not a libertarian, and that libertarianism is fucking dumb.

I tried, at least.

Nailed it!

I like leftists who say you don't agree with an ideology because you think they are horses asses rather than their ideas, then you vote for Democrats who are both horses asses and have no actual ideas ...

Sadly for you, I have voted for one Democrat in my life, at the behest of William F. Buckley (who was a libertarian and is spinning in his grave at what assholes like you have done to the conservative movement).

Liar. You know you just voted for Hillary. You defended her all through the election and are still doing it

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

You live in a very black and white world, it seems. Freedom has to be absolute or it does not exist. Authority has to be absolute or it does not exist.

In my world of colors and shades, it is wrong to say that if something is not absolute then it does not exist.

I have authority over my children while they live in my house, but it is not absolute as they can choose to disobey either openly or covertly. But I still have authority over them. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between a child and a parent?

My boss at works holds some authority over me at work, he gets to tell me what kind of clothes to wear, where to be to perform my job, what to do while I am at work and to an extent how to do my job. Now I can choose to ignore one or upto all of these things, and then I would face a consequence for my actions. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between an employee and an employer.

 

[gipper]

I once thought I was libertarian. Then I went to a few meetings of the libertarians and thought they all sounded like goddamn morons. So, I figured it wasn't really rational to think that I was doing it correctly, and all of them were doing it wrong... so I decided I was not a libertarian, and that libertarianism is fucking dumb.

I tried, at least.

Nailed it!

I like leftists who say you don't agree with an ideology because you think they are horses asses rather than their ideas, then you vote for Democrats who are both horses asses and have no actual ideas ...

Sadly for you, I have voted for one Democrat in my life, at the behest of William F. Buckley (who was a libertarian and is spinning in his grave at what assholes like you have done to the conservative movement).

This is funny....no?

 

[bripat9643]

A company is going to differentiate itself by preying on the customers of other security agencies? Really? And you believe those other agencies wouldn't feel threatened by such a business model?

Talk about being massively stupid and even more naive

Other companies don't give a shit about protecting you, Virginia

You obviously too fucking dumb to understand what I'm saying. They care about protecting their customers. If they stop coing that, they soon won't have any customers. You're believe that intelligent people are going to stand around with their thumbs up their ass will some security company converts to a criminal gang that preys on their customers is too stupid for words to describe.

You're a joke, little boy. Leftists on the board always inform me how rich they are. You can be anything you want on the internet. So whatever.

But you have no idea what companies would do for money. I do both professionally and personally.

I'm just laughing at you that you think companies will behave when rich companies and people are willing to pay them to not behave.

You're completely over your head. Here's your bottle. Or in your and oddballs case should I say bwattle?

There are plenty of wealthy people right now who would pay some security company from becoming a criminal gang. What's stopping them?

Well, on the subject at hand, your property rights are recognized and protected by government. Which was my point. It's one of the half dozen or so legitimate powers I listed for government.

I realize you can't detect a pattern between a duck, a goose and a swan, but again my standard was clear. I see the only legitimate powers of government where you can only have one of something. There can be only one property line between you and your neighbor. It can't be set between you and your neighbor or between your security companies

Meaningless twaddle. People settled property rights issues long before the government got involved. Read up on Common Law and how it came into being. It isn't government created law. It's private law.

 

[bripat9643]

I once thought I was libertarian. Then I went to a few meetings of the libertarians and thought they all sounded like goddamn morons. So, I figured it wasn't really rational to think that I was doing it correctly, and all of them were doing it wrong... so I decided I was not a libertarian, and that libertarianism is fucking dumb.

I tried, at least.

Nailed it!

I like leftists who say you don't agree with an ideology because you think they are horses asses rather than their ideas, then you vote for Democrats who are both horses asses and have no actual ideas ...

Sadly for you, I have voted for one Democrat in my life, at the behest of William F. Buckley (who was a libertarian and is spinning in his grave at what assholes like you have done to the conservative movement).

So who are you pretending to have voted for?

 

[Brian Blackwell]

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

You live in a very black and white world, it seems. Freedom has to be absolute or it does not exist. Authority has to be absolute or it does not exist.

In my world of colors and shades, it is wrong to say that if something is not absolute then it does not exist.

I have authority over my children while they live in my house, but it is not absolute as they can choose to disobey either openly or covertly. But I still have authority over them. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between a child and a parent?

My boss at works holds some authority over me at work, he gets to tell me what kind of clothes to wear, where to be to perform my job, what to do while I am at work and to an extent how to do my job. Now I can choose to ignore one or upto all of these things, and then I would face a consequence for my actions. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between an employee and an employer.

Well, I do admit shades of grey where appropriate, but authority means what it means - it is the right to rule. There’s no room for cherry picking. If there is, then it is not authority because it does not act as the ultimate decision maker.

If you can pick and choose when to obey, then what’s the difference between authority and advice, suggestion, advertising, reading a book, or being exposed to any idea at all? All ideas are subject to your review, and you ultimately choose which to listen to. External authority does not exist in reality, though continuous consent with “authority” will create the illusion that it does.

Maybe parents are stewards and guides at best, and tyrants at worst. Bosses are property owners with the associated rights. They can tell you what to do while you are interacting with their property - the business - but the only rights they have is to tell you to get out if they don’t like what you’re doing, and to defend their property if you won’t leave. One could say their authority is over the property, not you, if we must use the term.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

You live in a very black and white world, it seems. Freedom has to be absolute or it does not exist. Authority has to be absolute or it does not exist.

In my world of colors and shades, it is wrong to say that if something is not absolute then it does not exist.

I have authority over my children while they live in my house, but it is not absolute as they can choose to disobey either openly or covertly. But I still have authority over them. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between a child and a parent?

My boss at works holds some authority over me at work, he gets to tell me what kind of clothes to wear, where to be to perform my job, what to do while I am at work and to an extent how to do my job. Now I can choose to ignore one or upto all of these things, and then I would face a consequence for my actions. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between an employee and an employer.

Well, I do admit shades of grey where appropriate, but authority means what it means - it is the right to rule. There’s no room for cherry picking. If there is, then it is not authority because it does not act as the ultimate decision maker.

If you can pick and choose when to obey, then what’s the difference between authority and advice, suggestion, advertising, reading a book, or being exposed to any idea at all? All ideas are subject to your review, and you ultimately choose which to listen to. External authority does not exist in reality, though continuous consent with “authority” will create the illusion that it does.

Maybe parents are stewards and guides at best, and tyrants at worst. Bosses are property owners with the associated rights. They can tell you what to do while you are interacting with their property - the business - but the only rights they have is to tell you to get out if they don’t like what you’re doing, and to defend their property if you won’t leave. One could say their authority is over the property, not you, if we must use the term.

Here is the meaning of authority...Tell me how the Govt or your boss or a parent does not have this.

au·thor·i·ty
əˈTHôrədē/
noun

1. 1.
   the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.

 

[kaz]

Other companies don't give a shit about protecting you, Virginia

You obviously too fucking dumb to understand what I'm saying. They care about protecting their customers. If they stop coing that, they soon won't have any customers. You're believe that intelligent people are going to stand around with their thumbs up their ass will some security company converts to a criminal gang that preys on their customers is too stupid for words to describe.

You're a joke, little boy. Leftists on the board always inform me how rich they are. You can be anything you want on the internet. So whatever.

But you have no idea what companies would do for money. I do both professionally and personally.

I'm just laughing at you that you think companies will behave when rich companies and people are willing to pay them to not behave.

You're completely over your head. Here's your bottle. Or in your and oddballs case should I say bwattle?

There are plenty of wealthy people right now who would pay some security company from becoming a criminal gang. What's stopping them?

Well, on the subject at hand, your property rights are recognized and protected by government. Which was my point. It's one of the half dozen or so legitimate powers I listed for government.

I realize you can't detect a pattern between a duck, a goose and a swan, but again my standard was clear. I see the only legitimate powers of government where you can only have one of something. There can be only one property line between you and your neighbor. It can't be set between you and your neighbor or between your security companies

Meaningless twaddle. People settled property rights issues long before the government got involved. Read up on Common Law and how it came into being. It isn't government created law. It's private law.

People settled property rights when there was way more land than people. To say that it would work the same way on a planet with billions is just the intellectual vacuum that you have between your ears

 

[Oddball]

People settled property rights when there was way more land than people. To say that it would work the same way on a planet with billions is just the intellectual vacuum that you have between your ears

Maybe property rights will be protected a different way...Look at what's happening with blockchain technology right now...Nobody could have predicted that a decade ago....Just goes to show what folly it is to try and project future possibilities, by using the ignorance of today....Necessity being the mother of invention and all that...What do know is that aggression and compulsion are the antithesis of imagination, invention, and real liberty.

 

[gipper]

Time to put this thread to bed.

Let's all agree to the obvious...that government ALWAYS SUCKS. It is a scam and a scheme perpetrated by the elites, to enrich and empower THEMSELVES, at the expense of everyone else.

 

[Oddball]

Time to put this thread to bed.

Let's all agree to the obvious...that government ALWAYS SUCKS. It is a scam and a scheme perpetrated by the elites, to enrich and empower THEMSELVES, at the expense of everyone else.

Without question...Yet, as this thread demonstrates, there will always be people who honestly believe that they need a special carve-out to use state aggression, in order to achieve their allegedly just ends...These are the same ones who foolishly think that they can keep the beast of The State constrained in their little favored areas.

 

[kaz]

People settled property rights when there was way more land than people. To say that it would work the same way on a planet with billions is just the intellectual vacuum that you have between your ears

Maybe property rights will be protected a different way...Look at what's happening with blockchain technology right now...Nobody could have predicted that a decade ago....Just goes to show what folly it is to try and project future possibilities, by using the ignorance of today....Necessity being the mother of invention and all that...What do know is that aggression and compulsion are the antithesis of imagination, invention, and real liberty.

OK. When you come up with a solution, let me know

 

[Brian Blackwell]

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

You live in a very black and white world, it seems. Freedom has to be absolute or it does not exist. Authority has to be absolute or it does not exist.

In my world of colors and shades, it is wrong to say that if something is not absolute then it does not exist.

I have authority over my children while they live in my house, but it is not absolute as they can choose to disobey either openly or covertly. But I still have authority over them. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between a child and a parent?

My boss at works holds some authority over me at work, he gets to tell me what kind of clothes to wear, where to be to perform my job, what to do while I am at work and to an extent how to do my job. Now I can choose to ignore one or upto all of these things, and then I would face a consequence for my actions. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between an employee and an employer.

Well, I do admit shades of grey where appropriate, but authority means what it means - it is the right to rule. There’s no room for cherry picking. If there is, then it is not authority because it does not act as the ultimate decision maker.

If you can pick and choose when to obey, then what’s the difference between authority and advice, suggestion, advertising, reading a book, or being exposed to any idea at all? All ideas are subject to your review, and you ultimately choose which to listen to. External authority does not exist in reality, though continuous consent with “authority” will create the illusion that it does.

Maybe parents are stewards and guides at best, and tyrants at worst. Bosses are property owners with the associated rights. They can tell you what to do while you are interacting with their property - the business - but the only rights they have is to tell you to get out if they don’t like what you’re doing, and to defend their property if you won’t leave. One could say their authority is over the property, not you, if we must use the term.

Here is the meaning of authority...Tell me how the Govt or your boss or a parent does not have this.

au·thor·i·ty
əˈTHôrədē/
noun

1. 1.
   the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.

When you say “the power” do you mean the physical ability, or the moral right?

 

[bripat9643]

I applaud your steadfast resolve in disobeying a direct order. That is how large-scale evil is averted.

Then we agree on the position of external authority as below internal authority. Now we have to sort out the implications of that acknowledgement.

What does it mean to say that government has authority, but that we have greater authority to decide our own behavior? Is it not to say that government simply does not have authority? In what sense do they have authority if you reserve the right and ability to disobey at your own discretion?

You live in a very black and white world, it seems. Freedom has to be absolute or it does not exist. Authority has to be absolute or it does not exist.

In my world of colors and shades, it is wrong to say that if something is not absolute then it does not exist.

I have authority over my children while they live in my house, but it is not absolute as they can choose to disobey either openly or covertly. But I still have authority over them. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between a child and a parent?

My boss at works holds some authority over me at work, he gets to tell me what kind of clothes to wear, where to be to perform my job, what to do while I am at work and to an extent how to do my job. Now I can choose to ignore one or upto all of these things, and then I would face a consequence for my actions. If you disagree, then what word would you use to describe the relationship between an employee and an employer.

Well, I do admit shades of grey where appropriate, but authority means what it means - it is the right to rule. There’s no room for cherry picking. If there is, then it is not authority because it does not act as the ultimate decision maker.

If you can pick and choose when to obey, then what’s the difference between authority and advice, suggestion, advertising, reading a book, or being exposed to any idea at all? All ideas are subject to your review, and you ultimately choose which to listen to. External authority does not exist in reality, though continuous consent with “authority” will create the illusion that it does.

Maybe parents are stewards and guides at best, and tyrants at worst. Bosses are property owners with the associated rights. They can tell you what to do while you are interacting with their property - the business - but the only rights they have is to tell you to get out if they don’t like what you’re doing, and to defend their property if you won’t leave. One could say their authority is over the property, not you, if we must use the term.

Here is the meaning of authority...Tell me how the Govt or your boss or a parent does not have this.

au·thor·i·ty
əˈTHôrədē/
noun

1. 1.
   the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.

When you say “the power” do you mean the physical ability, or the moral right?

There's no distinction between the two in his mind.