ClumsyMonkey.net

http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

watch that movie and then let's go. i want to hear your arguments against individual rights after seeing that.

the movie spells it out for your really well. very well done. it's about five minutes long.

cute

That's all well and good in theory.

I don't live in theory, I live in reality.

Daiye Spa wrote:That's all well and good in theory.

I don't live in theory, I live in reality.

Hey, that's an incredibly vague respone. Any part of that in particular that you have trouble with?

Aerin, you can't disprove a theory by saying "it would never work" because of course it would work.

what is so utopian about refusing to iniate force or request that somebody else do so on your behalf? really, what is so utopian about it?

Because it goes against human nature. Power vacuums have only ever ended in one way: with a new power taking its place. Call me jaded, but I don't trust people to suddenly all change and say, "Hey, I don't want to control people anymore! Let's all start living in peace and harmony and get rid of government! Anyone up for a round of 'We Are The World'?"

It's a nice theory. But it wouldn't work. And trying it would be disastrous.

Hence me liking the idea of a libertarian government.

mosaik wrote:Aerin, you can't disprove a theory by saying "it would never work" because of course it would work.

That doesn't really make any sense... So any theory will work just because somebody theorized it?

You don't have to trust people. If somebody tries to use force against you, you protect yourself. I personally still believe that protecting yourself works a hell of a lot better then waiting for the government to do it.

And of course, everything presented on that website is absolutely true with respect to our rights and the rights of the officials. My favorite part was the bit about good people encouraging evil people by allowing force to be used to their ends.

I'd like to hear from the non-anarchist/libertarians and have somebody explain to me the theoretical reason they support government - where do they get the rights they give to their leaders, etc etc.

Haven't we discussed the social contract before?

who decides the terms of this "social contract"? other people.
how do they make me accept it's terms? by force.
can i withdraw from it at any time? no.
how is this enforced? with violence.

it's not a contract if you have no choice.

not to mention, by enforcing this 'contract' you give the government rights you don't have yourself. the state uses force to make others follow their vision - and as we've seen the movie, they have no ethical right to do this.

The government owns the land, the government makes the rules. Those that accept the rules live happily in the country. Those that don't like the rules can live elsewhere.

We've discussed this already.

They still have NO RIGHT to murder, enslave or steal. those things are never ok.

and, they don't own the land. we've discussed THAT already.

Yes, we discussed it and we had differing opinions on both topics, as I recall.

Today at work I was thinking something... perhaps one of you anarchy believers could help me out.

Around here they've been implementing a law in which smoking is no longer allowed in public buildings. Now if everyone governed themselves and there were no laws that would mean you could smoke anywhere you wanted. But wouldn't this be forcing others to breathe in your second hand smoke? You surely cannot say that it's our choice to breathe, and according to you we should all be able to do as we feel without any sort of force.

I was just wondering how you would solve this? And please do not reply with "it's the person's choice to be in this situation where they're breathing in second hand smoke" because in many cases the individual has no choice but to be where they are at the moment.

Kill the smoker, save yourself. Gots to love that "rational self interest".

Oh, and am I the only one who finds it dreadfully ironic that Mr. Anarchy calls himself "Dictator"?

He would be the ruler of the anachry, obviously.

J-Neli, there would be no such thing as a "public place" in anarchy. So if you're smoking, you are either on someone else's property, in which case they can decide whether or not you're allowed to, or your own property, in which case YOU decide if you can smoke.