Learn. To use. The quote feature. NOW.
But the state abuse wasn’t stopped; another state or version of the state started abusing again.
So you keep saying. And it’s time for you to prove it.
He said SOCIALIZED, not SOCIALISM. And I notice that you’re too lazy to use the quote feature.
And yet it’s still socialized provision.
No, it isn’t.
Because he knows he can’t support it. And I think it’s time he supports his claim or leaves.
He thinks that just because the U.S. government allows people to vote and to sue it, that that constitutes consent. He obviously does not live in reality and has no substantive arguments to make.
Knight of BAAWA writes, “Learn. To use. The quote feature. NOW.”
How dictatorial of you, sir. Perhaps you are not yet true to your philosophy of Anarchism? Probably this is why you are attempting to insist that everyone must think the way you do.
PatriotforFreedom: “Correct. You asked for examples of when state abuse was stopped. I provided them.”
Knight of BAAWA: “But the state abuse wasn’t stopped; another state or version of the state started abusing again.”
False. The state abuse for those states in existence at the time was stopped – and technically, before a new state was formed. That instances of the abuse of a constitution, which is not the same as pure state abuse, began later is irrelevant to what was proven.
PatriotforFreedom: “The counter argument which you have continually ignored, is that governments have been of service to men, and that they will always be much more consistent and so more efficient than any real or imagined state of Anarchy.”
Knight of BAAWA: “So you keep saying. And it’s time for you to prove it.”
PatriotforFreedom: “Yes, you do appear lazy now, because the raising of a Navy does not fit into the definition of socialism also earlier given.”
Knight of BAAWA: “He said SOCIALIZED, not SOCIALISM. And I notice that you’re too lazy to use the quote feature.”
Semantics. Perhaps you are not true to your earlier desire not to deploy the tactic?
We are free here to use the features as we choose. Or are you set against that freedom?
And as to your claim of laziness, please now prove that using a series of other features requires less effort than using the quote feature.
PatriotforFreedom: “A Navy, such as we currently employ, constitutes neither common worker ownership of a “means of production” (as in a factory), or the “distribution of goods” (as in a transportation company). It seems you have failed to understand Karl Marx.”
Knight of BAAWA: “And yet it’s still socialized provision.”
Come now, dear BAAWA, it is you that scream for proof then make an assertion with no premises for it. How disingenuous.
PatriotforFreedom: “Our Navy is a freely contracted means of protection.”
Knight of BAAWA: “No, it isn’t.”
Please prove your assertion.
No, it’s not. Perhaps you enjoy being a troll. Tell you what: you believe in might makes right, i.e. you support a government. So now you’ll have an object lesson of what that really means.
I see you repeatedly make the same mistake over and over again, and it is also a very common one. Anarchism does not mean NO RULES, anarchism means no RULERS.
I could summarize your entire idea of freedom in the following statement.
You are free to move about the confines of this prison.
Patriot:
When you click reply, you will see in bold, above where you type your response, a bluish-gray box that contains the content of the post to which you are replying. Beneath that is a hyperlinked (blue) word: Quote. Click that. You will then see a bracketed set of words that say [ quote user=“Knight_of_BAAWA” ] or whomever it is you are replying to. Now, push Ctrl and then the “End” button. Your cursor will now appear below the quoted section.
That’s a start.
Now, you have learned how to use the quote feature.
Now then, if you wish to break up the quoted section, as BAAWA likes to do, you have do a little extra typing. Here is an example. Let’s say you are responding to a post made by Lester. Lester made two comments. You want to address them separately. Here is how you do it:
[ quote user=“lester” ]
Pigs are cool, yo!
[ /quote ]
YOUR RESPONSE HERE
[ quote user=“lester” ]
Cows are whack, yo!
[ /quote ]
YOUR SECOND RESPONSE HERE
The only difference between what I have posted above and what you will post when actually replying is that I put a space after the left brackets and before the right brackets, so that the coding would show up.
This will make your posts more comprehensible.
Thank you
McD
Yeah, he does not get that just because slaves can eat, breathe, and play does not mean they were free.
Another post for Patriot Freedom.
On the topic of Justice.
What’s wrong with selling drugs?
How are the people going to decide what the government can and can not do? How do the people decide what that percentage is? I’m talking about using practical reason. The real-time instances on how people decide what a government does and doesn’t do on a minute basis.
I’m bumping this because I just came across it and found it quite enjoyable. I read the first page and then got to the bottom and realized it went on for 5 more.
This is just a fun read, and the whole thread took place over the course of just six days, two years ago. Enjoy
lol that’s what I did too 
well, I skipped 3 pages, but still, enjoyable read THANKS
What then, sir, are you left with for allegiance?
I give allegiance to Murray Rothbard and to whichever private enforcement agencies/militias/courts I shall subscribe to in Anarcho-Capitalism. Subscription, like that to a magazine, certainly constitutes a voluntary allegiance, albeit one I am free to terminate at any point in time.
“I pledge allegiance to Murray Newton Rothbard, and to the Anarcho-Capitalism for which he stands, the Individual under Non-Aggression, inalienable, with Liberty and Justice for all.”
EDIT- Wait, thought this was a new topic. >_>