How do I argue with a statist?

[DanielMuffinburg]

@laminustacitus

@Daniel

There is no good reason to believe that the state could establish and maintain an institutional framework in which the market can function efficiently.

Then you are oblivious to the world around you.

Are you saying that the state has established and maintained an institutional framework in which the market has functioned efficiently?

[Lilburne]

@laminustacitus

Certain actions have, but those have not been able to completely undo society in the long-run.

Now that’s a ringing endorsement. [:P]

@laminustacitus

Justice is, by its very nature, empirical

Justice? I thought you were just concerned with division of labour and inter-temporal planning.

@laminustacitus

it cannot rest on a priori proofs

Then, why are you demanding an a priori proof for the efficacy of anarchism?

[Conza]

@Snowflake

@Conza88

The argument from efficiency is so useless.

Why? The state is a complete failure in every way.

Forget The Argument From Efficiency - LewRockwell

672 Minarchism, Libertarianism and Logic

“The state is not inefficient for everyone…”

[:)]

[Thedesolateone]

@ OP

Don’t go straight out saying you want to abolish the state. Never deny it, but don’t let them bring it in as a “knockdown argument”. It shouldn’t be like this, but people don’t respect us if they know of our anti-statism.

Argue against specific things. Point out how regulation isn’t needed when it is relevant to what you are already talking about. Point out how the state messes so many things up. Point out the flaws in the reasoning of statists and Keynesians.

Then when they’re a minarchist (i.e. ideal situation), they should be convertable to full freedom. That’s how it worked on me, although noone was converting me, it was happening in my head, and through mises.org readership and posting here.

[The_Late_Andrew_Ryan]

@laminustacitus

@Daniel

Did I offend you?

Why would you offend me?

@liberty student

@laminustacitus

Maybe you should abandon the idea that it is such a self evident fact (or even a fact at all).

Lam, do you need the state?

To flourish in a material sense, I need the state to establish an institutional framework in which the market can function efficiently. Without the state, there is no good reason to believe why private defense providers would cooperate thus there is no method of knowing a priori whether an anarchist society would be able to provide the necessary institutions to cultivate the division of labor, and inter-temporal planning.

There’s also no example of a state that has only been constrained to defence functions for any significant period of time without soon beggining to sip from the poisoned bottle of statism, interventionism and corpratism (with the possibile exception of western countries in the 1800s but ooooh how the tides have turned!). Why wouldn’t defence agencies work together? That’s like saying phone lines or banks would never work with each other

[Snowflake]

@Conza88

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/molyneux6.html

672 Minarchism, Libertarianism and Logic

“The state is not inefficient for everyone…”

I dont have time to listen to the clip now but it occurred to me after I posted that there are several obvious counters to what I was saying ><

I suppose I meant the state is bad for the common man/overall.