strawman analogies notwithstanding. Where is the logic in labeling as folly a system that is in power and that you contribute at least 5-6 months of your labor to support?
I should ask you "where is the logic in continuing the cycle of violence and oppression?–Malalchi
Ask the statist whose government you support against your will with your labor and freedoms. The logic is that the statist cannot achieve power via peaceful means so they gain and hold power by coercive means at your expense, that is the logic.
So I treat people the way I would like to be treated and so far anarchy has worked for me. --Malachi
Anarchy is the absence of government. There is about as much anarchy in society today as their was freedom to a black living under chattel slavery in the antebellum South. The truth is that government dominates your existence even if you refuse to acknowledge this fact. Or are you saying that the present power arrangement doesn’t negatively impact and influence your personal life?
7.2 million Americans who are under the control of the correctional system RIGHT NOW might argue with that. Somewhere between 100,000 and half a million iraqis would also, if they were not dead.–Malachi
I posted empircial evidence that proved almost 500,000 Iraqi lives have been saved since Operation Iraqi Freedom. Go back and review the posts on this thread for the links. As a result, coercion against despots to promote life and liberty saves lives.
By acts of omission, anarchist pacifism costs lives and property over generations due to unchecked statist abuses.
Gandi survived numerous attacks and attempts on his life, which would seem to cast doubt on your apparent belief that violence must be followed by retaliatory violence.-- Malachi
That is a very unconvincing argument on the efficacy of non-violence to gain ends. Gandhi’s goal was a unified India, the end result was assassination and a divided sub-continent, not to mention millions of dead and destitute. Of course you are welcome to follow Gandhi’s non-violent stance and continue to reside on the dust bin of history with the rest of anarchist adherents.
However I dont want to spend too long on this example, since we are not pacifists. I do wonder what business you have mentioning torture here since you have done nothing but defend endless war and the state.-- Malachi
Strawman. I do not support endless war or the state. I support coercive means to free the citizen from the state. Big difference unless your a pacifist. And I can prove that you are a pacifist and that your ideology is unsustainable.
Question:
Would you invest in a corporation that gained profits by supporting coercive enterprises?
what evidence do you have (scientific or not) that minarchism is possible but anarchism is impossible?-- Malachi
Minarchism establishes political structures that are designed specifically to limit, balance, decentralize and make transparent government power and coercive enterprises. Essentially classical liberalism/minarchism is designed to gather statists in a Constitutional ‘prison’ where they, the parasites, compete for inconsequential political spoils under the gaze of free people. It is amusing that you claim my minarchist stance as “faith-based” when it is ascendant and this cult was promoted by the genius of our founding fathers and more recently the genius of von MIses. In addition, if this system was a fantasy, it is indeed a very realistic cult that dominates the globe including your existence.
You asked for a quote, here’s one:
| There are people who call government an evil, although a necessary evil. However, what is needed in order to attain a definite end must not be called an evil … Government may even be called the most beneficial of all earthly institutions as without it no peaceful human cooperation, no civilization and no moral life would be possible. – von Mises, Economic Freedom and Interventionism |
|---|
Anarchism has no mechanisms to prevent the emergence of absolutism since coercive power is opaque, centralized and without limit. Essentially anarchism allows for vertical and horizontal monopolies of the elements of coercion without any type of institutionalized checks and balances to prevent territorial monopolies of armed force.
Do some reading on counterinsurgency and see whether it is better to kill people or change their minds. Recognize that some people force you to kill them, sometimes, but its harder to make that argument when you are part of an invasion/occupying force.–Malachi
It is better to assist those that have national security interests that are in opposition to potential enemies or that are nominally aligned with those of the United States. As a minarchist I do not advocate using US conventional forces in Central Asian backwaters. Rather we should be providing technical, intelligence, training, munitions, and air support to indiginous freedom fighters in regions hostile to Western interests (life, liberty, private property)
Again I can prove your a pacifist:
Question:
Are you opposed to providing logistical support, close air support, training and munitions to anti-communists and anti-Islamists in North Korea, Zimbabwe Iran Syria Cuba and other regions and states under the yoke of despotism.?
lets see an example of how you would use aggressive violence to obtain liberty or property. Since you are already alive, I wonder how you intend to “obtain” life with coercion. Would you coerce a fertile young woman into accepting your seed?–Malachi
Another strawman. Of course rape is reprehensible. Perhaps your emotional hatred of minarchism undermines your ability to engage in objective judgment
Coercion against a rapist either in the act or after the fact is not only permissable but desired.
it is highly unlikely we advocate the same ends, assuming we live in the same country, because I do not seem to feel the need to resort to coercion to obtain private property. I just find someone with the stuff I want and make a deal.–Malachi
Your ability to engage in these practices is significantly undermined by the statists that you discount as ‘folly’
that statement reads like a public school textbook. I honestly dont even think you have been to south america or asia when you say things like that.-Malachi
I have been to both South America and Asia many times. Your ad hominem argument notwithstanding.
But, perhaps your idea of freedom, prosperity, stability, and peace involves a single protest movement with events on 6 continents, roving death squads that kill random kids and turn their corpses in for bounties, more laws creating victimless crimes than any man can know, and violent racist mob attacks.–Malachi
Can you name a period in North America, South AMerica, Europe and the Asian Rim that has been more peaceful, prosperous, free and stable as under AMerican hegemony ?
lol explain please? Subjugation without limit? You must love to dominate people, which is why you find it so hard to face life without violence. You should get a job where you get to be an enforcer. Come back here and tell us how awesome it was to detain and search a dozen afghan families. Tell us how much freedom and prosperity was created while you humiliated the patriarch in front of his tribe or clan.–Malachi
The present use of American conventional forces to combat 70 IQ Islamic drones fighting from caves is not cost effective. I pointed out in an earlier post that the most effective means to combat anti-Western despots abroad is to provide material support to indigenous ‘freedom fighters’ in these states and regions.
Which begs another question:
Do anarchists support freedom movements in other regions of the globe?
Or do you lock the doors and pull the covers over yourselves when your neighbor is being plundered because it is none of your business ?