I have, and that's what many of them are.
Now I'll just have to say that you're a liar.
Not to mention many of them merely reference entities such as the scientific theories, such as evolution, or make use of systems such as the internet, which were devised via universities, government funding, and so on. (Though most myths about government funding, or "public private" are false dichotomies or based on outdated information to begin with anyway).
So they have no business using things that were created by means that were entirely beyond their control?...Really?
Well if they are, then so will I, problem solved.
So I just view it like Utopian Marxism.
Only because you are a grossly malinformed bigot.
I've addressed in the past, and that's what it's predicated on, nonsense in theory and practice and based on false axioms, such as engaging in act of aggression, like using fighting words on the internet, to advocate a philosophy of "non-aggression", lying about what our current system of government is, what "totalitarian", "tyranny", philosophies of "might makes right", "elitism" and so forth are, denying the reality of evil within human nature and advocating worldviews that justify child rape, pedophilia, and things of that nature.
Only addressing certain types or instances of aggression or immoral worldviews within certain contexts, while ignoring other forms of aggression or immoral worldviews within other contexts in which they occur; public, private, or other false dichotomies such as that, in theory and practice; not accepting that perfect "non-aggression" does not exist except in pure theory; even speaking in a public place creates sound waves which "aggress" upon the ears of another, much as parenting a child "aggresses" upon a child without consent.
Hypocritically appealing to "America", the "Founding Fathers", and so forth, when by, say "ancap" logic, America was always totalitarian, socialist, and so forth from its very inception, as are all government regardless of differences in design or structure; attacking "psychology" (psychoanalysis specifically) while lying or misinformed in regards to it being a business or voluntary association to begin with, while basing their theories on outdated psychology itself (e.x. the psychology of Locke, often), based on contradictory principles in regards to dichotomies drawn between humans and animals on the basis of rational or reasoning ability (in reality some people, such as Einstein reason more than less intelligent people, and therefore should have more "rights" by their own logic, so they contradict themselves and appeal to something intrinsically "human" instead, not mere reasoning ability in a vacuum or in isolation). Appealing to theories or individuals who themselves were an intellectual "elite", who formed their theories in universities which historically have been state or "government" funded to begin with, and so on and so forth.
This is only a start.[/QUOTE]
Other examples, conflating the philosophy of the law with "jealousy", as opposed to other legal and ethical concepts, such as "modesty", which is therefore a lie, and a double standard, since by the virture of their own logic, one could argue their opposition to intellectual elites or those they view as "tyrants" is motivated by jealously, not a sincere disapproval of that worldview.
Objecting only to that worldview in select contexts, often based on the false "public/private" dichotomy, when in reality anyone who has or holds such as worldview in any context would need to be opposed on a personal and voluntary basis, or else they wouldn't give a damn about using whatever is in their power to crush or dominate others, whether in a shady business or "corporate" context (such as using the federal government to levy taxes against rival corporations), or in a "public" or officially governmental context, as interrogatable as both actually are in practice.
Appealing to America, or inaccurate myths about America as it was originally founded, and its various institutions, when by an anarchist standard, America and its Framers were always totalitarian, socialist, authoritarian despots, and so forth, by the virture of simply being a "government" at all, while conversely arguing in favor of "blind faith" toward "Americans" as a group or demographic, which isn't the view of Americans or people in general (nor was their view, as far as I know, entirely cyncial or misanthropic like Hobbes); none of the founders were "anarchists" nor would there be any "America" if they were, since they would have opted out of the revolutionary war to begin with on the basis of it being "violent" or "aggressive"; not to mention their Rousseauian view of people being complete "good" by nature alone is nonsensical or contradictory, because government is viewed as "bad", people create or form governments, therefore people are not actually good, nor did the founders form America in "isolation" but did so cooperatively; most Americans not being anarchists, so most Americans, simply by virture of being "American" to begin with are totalitarian, socialists.
Attacking the "state" or its "servants" as a whole (which the Founders are and were themselves), while ignoring the philosophy upon which the state is founded, such as checks and balances, or servants, whether military or law enforcement or others needed to preserve the existence of the state and the rights to begin with, which wouldn't happen in an anarchy, many would simply seek to dominate or terrorize others by force; using other myths, such as "police" not having existed when the nation was founded (when in reality, the military was the "police" during that day and age, effectively martial law, hence the long forgotten 3rd Amendment).
Appealing to other demigogues contradictorily, such as Ayn Rand (who was a totalitarian socialist by their own definition, having eventually relented and accepting Medicare, and having believed that stealing land from native American "savages" was morally right and justifiable, nor having been an "anarchist" to begin with, but a "minarchist" and therefore a "totalitarian socialist"; ignoring the fact that other demigogues such as Murray Rothbard himself founded and formulated their intellectual views and cemented their status as intellectual elites via their work in universities and other public or "government" funded institutions.
Ignoring the reality of the Founding of America (e.x. taxation without representation being advocated, not "no taxation"), often conflating or ignoring differences between federal and state funding, and the reality of the Constitution itself, whether "general welfare" or anything else, such as there being nothing in the Constitution about state funding or "welfare" to begin with, which the Common Law system as a whole is anyway, to an anarchist at least.
Ignoring the reality of false "public / private" dichotomies, and how in practice, they are not entirely separate except in pure abstraction ("public" institutions receive private funding, while "private" ones use public funding), admitting the their utopian theories, like Marxism or Communism wouldn't work in practice, as they continue to use publicly funded services such as the internet or publicly funded services in their own nation or state, admitting that it wouldn't work, while ignoring the fact that there are individuals and communities who practice devout non-aggression, "living off the grid", nonviolence and so forth (whether "freegans" or Catholic or Buddhist monks), at best even then only minimizing aggression, not eliminating it, which is physically impossible.
Objecting only to certain instances of aggression in certain contexts based on false premises or emotional reasons rather than facts, reason, logic, and so forth (often supporting taxation, such as in the instance of bank bailouts, while conversely objecting to "food stamps" and so forth, often based on false factuality and logic, showing no consistent principle and simple favoritism or emotional hyperbole, reasons, and no childish logic); ignoring the realities and actual uses and purposes of taxation in practice, by state or federal governments, in favor of simple or inaccurate, or naïve beliefs or axioms, which fund a myriad of institutions, whether 'poor', "wealthy", or otherwise, not able or willing to actually do any deep research on the history of government spending from its inception to the present day, for better or for worse.
Ignoring the reality of human nature, such as "taxation" in some form or another having been around since ancient times, such as in the Bible, and likely not completely avoidable ever, except in utopian dreams and fantasizes, leaving many of the gripes and complaints not really on the level of any serious discussion about America to begin with, since they're actually merely griping about mankind and human nature as it has been, to some degree or another since day 1.
Not delineating between taxation as justified and as used according to its actual intents, constitutional, state, or otherwise, and infantile proposals of "tyrannical" taxation, such as immoral or uneducated purposes as in wanting to "punish" people simply for owning private or personal property, as is their legal right on the state and the federal level, showing complete disregard and contempt of the law, such as the Common Law as well, along with ignorance or dishonesty about the genuine purposes, ideals, and intention behind it and other bodies of law...
I'll continue later.
