The Agorist Revolution is the overthrow of the state.
I’m guessing you don’t know many people like this.
Not that you’re wrong, subconsciously most do, however, at this point in time, most are also completely apathetic towards the state.
Sorry, we weren’t all born with the words of Konkin tattooed into our brains. Unfortunately, it took the 1970’s to form the doctrine comprehensively.
I’m not.
a crime isn’t differentiated by the intention of the criminal. i robbed the store in order to perform charitable works = i robbed the store for my own selfish ends. you probably could get a lesser sentence on mitigating factors, but the charge stays the same.
illegal trade (with the “noble” intention of furthering the agorist-new-order) = illegal trade (self interest, lowering of tax levied, etc.).
like i said, semantics.
I’m not sure how familiar you are with the American educational system, but the Constitution is is used as a major source of legitimacy of the government (and I am sure you are familiar with the resources governments spend to legitimize their actions). The founding fathers are revered, in some ways, by the history books used in our schools. I view Paul’s campaign as a major step which wakes people up to the fact that the Lockean experiment has failed. Paul admits we have strayed from the constitution, and he cannot win the election. The very document used to legitimize government is being shown to be discarded by that very government; the hypocrisy inherent in the system is becoming more obvious. The only support Paul gets is from anarchy itself: the internet. The logical conclusion is that limited government has failed to preserve liberty, and so something else must be tried.
Although this isn’t apparent to many Paul-supporters at the moment, I believe it will be in time.
I think that is a possibility. I think we should start a campaing to “Google Lysander Spooner”, LOL
Not all supporters of Ron Paul want a libertarian society, sadly, and as I said, I realized during the course of this debate that I had lost sight of the REAL goal, the truly MORAL goal, and was working myself into a frenzy about simply getting the man elected, as if that was it- no more; mission accomplished. In that respect, I thank you. I realized where I had gone astray. I also thank you for forcing me to look into agorism deeper than I previously had. Believe me, its not an interest that will go away any time soon. In the future, I may decide that politics is the wrong path. Who knows? I’m not convinced now, but I’m far less sure of it than I was. I feel good can come from the RP “revolution”. At any rate, its here, so we might as well capitalize on the new interest of being critical of the state, Austrian economics, and freedom. Libertarians, agorists or not, have to be ready to use these movements in one way or the other. We can’t simply ignore them.
Cheers!
Like I said, grasping at straws. [8-)]
Don’t really give a shit about old dead men from the 18th century of a different religion, ethnicity, and mindset.
Sorry.
Then they don’t apply the capital I’m speaking of anyways.
Me either. The point was that for many people (at least, many I know), Paul’s candidacy is de-legitimizing the federal government of the United States.
How many people?
I think his campaign is just delegitimizing today’s federal government in the lsot hopes that a better one can be established. Entirely defeating and in the end, disastrous.
Wow. You sound so educated with your self-censored swear words. Good job.
You come off as quite pompous, you realize? I’m telling you this for your own benefit. Not that I think you’ll listen. Is this your view of all of history? What naive ignorance. I’m pretty sure your hero SEKIII would be ashamed of you for saying such things.
tsk tsk
Two people I know are now anarchists, although I know very few who are at all interested in politics. I’d never heard Rothbard’s name mentioned in conversation before Paul’s candidacy.
I don’t deny that is going on as well, but it won’t take long for Paul’s supporters to realize that is just impossible.
I doubt Konkin or Rothbard would be ashamed. There is no such thing as too radical in the name of liberty.
No. I don’t censor myself. Mises.com censors me. I may put in a - between certain things so that they don’t, I should have said, I really don’t give a sh/it about Jorge Washington and Alejandro Hamerton.
As for SEK3 and Rothbard, I don’t see why. Maybe Rothbard because he was a weak strategist, but I don’t see what I do to make SEK3 ashamed. I’m venomous, my writing style is venomous, and I pull no punches. Why should I care about the “founders”? What did they find? Nothing that I care about!
I have. Then again, I live by a few more Anarchists than most people here who are divided along the lines of the internet geographically.
Then they wouldn’t be Ron Paul supporters anymore. As long as LewRockwell.com continues to post the epistles of Paul every day, I doubt it.
Wow, on a side note, that was really bad writing in terms of structure. I just cleaned it up A LOT, it’s almost a different article. I’d suggest reading it again if you couldn’t understand before.
I need to stop drinking and start going back to A.A. [D]
No, its not about Niccolo being too radical. Certainly not.
It’s his apparant naive disdain for history.
Rothbard wrote four large books about the American colonies and revolution, and from interviews I have read with SEKIII, he knew history pretty darn well, and it sounds like both appreciated its lessons relevance.
I just have a hard time seeing either of those two saying “I don’t give a **** about old men from different times blahblahblah”
Thats what I would expect from a 6th grader who doesn’t want to do his history homework.
Cheers!