That’s true, but Graham threatened me before and then tried to tell me banning me wasn’t taking away my freedom, just my power. Then I ask him that if his freedom is a right that can’t be taken away, why isn’t the government leaving him alone. I say it’s because he doesn’t have the power to enforce his rights. He says he refuses to enforce his rights if it means taking away someone else’s. Then he admits that both his freedom and his power have been taken away by the government. If this is possible, then it’s obviously possible to take away my freedom and power by banning me. If it’s possible to take someone’s freedom, then freedom is not a natural law in the way the laws of thermodynamics are. You can’t take away the laws of thermodynamics. But you can take away freedom. And power is the only way to get it back.
But if some people think taxation is a good idea and some think it bad, it doesn’t have the unanimous decision against it that murder and theft and rape do.
I dunno, are you getting what you want? You say the government still won’t leave you alone.
if i banned you you would not be less free. i will not have coerced you.
unfortunately we are not having a spoken conversation so there is no way i can speak slower.
all i can suggest is that you read it carefully maybe 5 or 6 times.
Ok. Graham said that. I said something different. And?..
Because it is a self-refuting position. The validation of rights only through the negation of another’s rights is absurd. It is no longer a question of ‘rights’ but violence.
You are postulating that if you don’t have the right to not be excluded from someone’s property then you are not free. Clearly that is an absurd statement.
i dont see the point going down this route because i dont feel i require life coaching from you.
would it be safe for me to cut to the chase and assume that what you are suggesting is that the Mises institute and the forum visitors form
an armed militia and declare independance from the union? NOW
So you admit to being a psychopath?
But you WILL have coerced me because I want to be able to speak on here, but you will have blocked my ability to do so with force. Is this not coercion? Have you not used force to limit my freedom and power?
Again, education.
So the nature of your enslavement is all you want changed? I think you are in the wrong place, revleft is better for you, they want nicer chains too…
Just think about it, you can have all the services you want, if you are poor enough, and well the government has to spend so much to make sure everyone has services, you are certain to be poor enough…
Socialism is the end result of moral nihilism
A=A does not convince the irrational, which is precisely what you are…
Since you equate the LAW with your reasoning to not murder, I suggest you look at the source of said law, just remember that you build yourself a reputation with every interaction, with ours, you get a wink and a smile at first sight…
Sometimes rape works best, I hope you never have a soap incident in the pen, you might forget all about your moral nihilism…
This is not your property and Graham has not threatened to use physical violence against you. Therefore no coercion.
No. Psychopaths lack empathy, not necessarily sympathy. In fact, psychopaths are more likely to feel sympathy, because they tend to be violent and desire to feel superiority over others.
They cannot relate to others or understand the decisions they make. They frequently cannot interact socially at all because social cues are lost on them. They do not understand others at all. Sympathy is something totally different. It’s a selfish feeling. A feeling of superiority. Empathy is putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. I’m very good at that. Sympathy is assuming someone else’s shoes are unfairly weighted before even trying to put them on. I don’t pretend to pity people. I would never do them or myself that disservice. Once you come to understand someone, usually it’s easy to see why their life is what it is. Empathy allows me to see personal responsibility. Sympathy would deny me that ability.
You should probably read up on psychopathy before you start throwing the word around.
you have a morons concept of coercion.
it is not coercion. it is not using force against you.
Yes, you should probably start your own region and if it works, people will join you. Do not explicate, demonstrate.
So it’s not using force because you’re pushing a button and not hitting me over the head?
Are you familiar with Stanley Milgram’s authority experiment where he got people to push a button to electrocute other people? They had the same distance from their victims as you do with the ban button.
Yup it fits. That is why I do not understand why you think taxation is OK.
Taxation is taking ones property without consent, and then spending it on something that is not consented to. Please explain to me why I would ever want a thief to steal from me, go to the store and buy me groceries that I do not want? Or even worse, spend it on something the thief wants?
You don’t understand, some people are perfectly ok with being taxed.
this is the advice you would give your elderly gran? if she is being mugged, well she doesnt want to be mugged, so she should of course, not be mugged!
silly granny letting the muggers that are mugging her mug her. she shouldnt ! silly silly.
if they voluntarily contribute then they arent being taxed. someone is just choosing to use the word ‘tax’ as a label for their voluntary contribution.
No you don’t understand, if morons want to pay taxes on an actual voluntary basis then there is no one in this forum who is going to coerce them to do otherwise. Those who don’t want to pay should not have to.