How do you know it was commonplace?
He was there. Saw it with his own eyes.
I concur with Caley - I don’t see how rape was commonplace in the Ancestral Environment. My own research has led me to the conclusion that humans are inherently promiscuous. Furthermore, the adoption of marriage was a reaction to presumably rampant STD infections that started after the advent of agriculture.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the state arose from the authoritarian family. Even today, many (if not most) parents act as though they own their children (if they don’t explicitly think they do).
As Clayton said, the state is efficient for some people - namely those running it. It’s usually not efficient in terms of the public rationales for its existence. Nevertheless, those who run the state apparently think that it’s userful (if not necessary) to lie about its reason for being, as that has made it easier for them to continue playing the exploitation game.
“Man has an overwhelming genetic propensity to choose the best means for his most important ends. His most important ends overwhelmingly involve material security, comfort, and prosperity. The best means for that is maximal capitalism. Once men are convinced of that by economic science, they will choose it.”
“The state happened to be invented before economic science could reveal the superiority of capitalism. Therefore, people in some societies thought erroneously that supporting a state apparatus was the most effective means to their ends. Thus the first states formed. And given the fact that at the time non-state societies had not YET developed economic calculation and the division of labor sufficiently to become supremely wealthy (keep in mind that anarchism is not synonymous with anarcho-capitalism, and a society can be slow to develop private property rights even without a state), state societies were able to produce the means of war to a superior degree, so the latter were able to over-run the former.” - Daniel James Sanchez
I’d recommend reading Bruce Benson’s book “The Enterpise of Law”. I’m just finishing it is awesome
A private judge is selling a service of impartial arbitration, if he is seen to be impartial by taking bribes he will lose customers.
We can expect the same benefits of competition in law that we can in baking. Compeition provides incentives to lower prices by cutting costs and increasing quality throught innovation.
In Chaos Theory, Robert Murphy writes the following (on page 25):
Another point to consider is the enhanced role of adoption in a free society. Much as it shocks modern sensibilities, there would be a fully functioning “baby market,” in which parental privileges were sold to the highest bidder.
After these two sentences, Murphy inserts a footnote that reads the following:
I am purposefully skirting the question of whether parents would legally “own” their children. So long as a child voluntarily remained with his parents, “living under their roof,” they could of course set any rules they wished. The only problem arises when a child runs away, and does not wish to return. I personally am sympathetic to the notion that so long as a child can support him or herself, parents can’t force the child to return home.
So do you think Murphy is implying that parents can force their children back if they do not have the means of supporting themselves? Discuss.
I guess it would be ok for the parent to force the child back into their home, since a child cant make rational decisions for his or herself since that child has not matured yet, and thus needs to depend on the parents to guide the child into adulthood.
“So do you think Murphy is implying that parents can force their children back if they do not have the means of supporting themselves? Discuss.”
If they do have the means to support themselves, they will be able to communicate as such - indicate they are running away, the reasons why and not going to return etc. Obviously they don’t HAVE to, since that might risk giving up the element of surprise to the abusive parents (because if your child is running away it’s pretty much guarenteed you’ve failed your role as an individual whose is to facilitate their growth into a mature adult) - but they have to at least be able to communicate.
Children and Rights by Rothbard
Check out Judge.me, a new Internet-based dispute resolution website, being touted as an equitable and affordable alternative to government courts. The creator sent me a note alerting me to it, and I’m very interested. He also did an AMA (“Ask Me Anything”) at Reddit. Here’s how it works.
In fact, Tom actually hosted the founder on the Peter Schiff Show today. You can download the episode at the link (might have to wait till later today..the show just ended.)
@JJ: Wow, that’s amazing. The “ex aequo et bono” principle they base their arbitration on is very much in line with what I line out in my Praxeological Account of Law. Two thumbs way up!!
Clayton -
disregard this, didn’t realize the link was already posted :-X
- The Captain is to have two full Shares; the Master is to have one share and a half; the Doctor, Mate, Gunner & Boatswain, one Share and a quarter.
- He that shall be found Guilty of taking up any unlawful Weapon on Board the Privateer, or any Prize, by us taken, so as to strike or abuse one another, in any regard, shall suffer what Punishment the Captain and Majority of the Company shall think fit.
- He that shall be found Guilty of Cowardice, in the Time of Engagement, shall suffer what punishment the Captain and Majority shall think fit.
- If any Gold, Jewels, Silver, &c. be found on Board of any Prizes, to the value of a Piece of Eight ; & the Finder do not deliver it to the Quarter-Master, in the Space of 24 Hours, shall suffer what Punishment the Captain and Majority shall think fit.
- He that is found Guilty of Gaming, or Defrauding another to the Value of a Shilling, shall suffer what Punishment the Captain and Majority of the Company shall think fit.
- He that shall have the Misfortune to lose a Limb, in time of Engagement, shall have the sum of one hundred and fifty Pounds Sterling, and remain with the Company as long as he shall think fit.
- Good Quarters will be given when called for.
- He that sees a Sail first, shall have the best Pistol, or Small-Arm, on Board her.
Ok.. you caught me… it was a sarcastic post..
They wouldn’t.
I just wanted to say that anyone considering using an arbitration service should really read the contract carefully because appealing a finding can be very difficult and there’s like a three month window for moving to have a finding vacated.
Some suggested reading:
Federal Arbitration Act and look for an arbitration act in your state as well for applicable rules.
Cable Connection Inc v DirectTV Inc.
There are ofcourse many others I just thought these would be useful and, to my knowledge, they’re current.
People should also look for a binding arbitration clause in any contract they sign as such instruments are often used to preclude the possibility of a court trial in the event of a dispute.
The Tom Woods interview with Judge.me founder Peter-Jan Celis:
It won’t and it can’t. Private courts would be no better than government courts. This is because of corruption in a position of power. These people on here assume law will naturally come about, but there will always be people, albeit a small minority, that will inevitably seek to steal and murder and, whenever possible, create chaos. Laws need to be objectively defined and realistic, and naturally enforced. Courts are pathetic. Let the citizens be their own defenders.
The last four sentences make absolutely no sense in light of everything you said before them.
Laws need to be objectively defined … Courts are pathetic. Let the citizens be their own defenders.
Nice catch, JJ 