Right Wing Discussion Thread IX: The Right Man's Burden

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

Private property is just a tautology.

Property exists independent of states.

[Napkiraly]

Of course the response to Islam, or more accurately its extremist sects, is not to launch some genocidal campaign across the globe.

Tell this to the US. They've been warring in the middle east for almost two decades.

America has not been launching genocidal campaigns in the Middle East, despite what Islamist propaganda would like people to believe.

[Conscentia]

Lead to? If you have private property, there already is one. Private property exists because the state enforces the property rights of it's owners.
I'm not arguing, as many do, that Ancapistan will produce a state. I'm arguing it never gets rid of it to begin with - it just changes the form of that state into a plutocracy.

What is the difference between a public police department and a privately owned one? Really only the name. Its no different than if your lot tried to get rid of the state, you would merely call it by a different name.

Literally my point.

[The East Marches II]

What is the difference between a public police department and a privately owned one? Really only the name. Its no different than if your lot tried to get rid of the state, you would merely call it by a different name.

Literally my point.

Yes and my point is you are no different yourself Bolshevik.

[Conscentia]

They'd have absolute control over the state apparatus since they own it. What more power do they need?

In what sense do they have absolute control?

Same sense that any unelected rulers do.

[Conscentia]

This is just circular logic now. The state exists because of private property, and then private property exists because of a state? Obviously one of your definitions are flawed, because nobody would equate private property with a state, if it is dependent on that state to exist in the first place. Therefore your argument is just affirming the consequent, and provides no evidence otherwise.

Consc never mentioned "the state exists because of private property," only the second statement, that private property exists because of a state. What Conscientia was arguing is that the state can primarily be defined by being an institution which protects a class system--a definition I'm not too sure of myself, but it's not circular. It's like saying 'laws only exist because of the state' (this is, of course, excluding systems of custom law--I'm talking about centrally-decided and enforced laws) and then saying that one of the state's defining features is that it creates and enforces laws. This isn't exactly circular, and is analogous to Conscientia's arguments. I have my own problems with Consc's argument, but it's a logically valid one, I think.

What exactly is the problem with characterising a social institution by it's actual characteristics?

Literally my point.

Yes and my point is you are no different yourself Bolshevik.

If you want to debate communism and whether or not it really abolishes the state, you are welcome to take this to the LWDT.

[The East Marches II]

Yes and my point is you are no different yourself Bolshevik.

If you want to debate communism and whether or not it really abolishes the state, you are welcome to take this to the LWDT.

Typical copout :^)

[The Empire of Pretantia]

If you want to debate communism and whether or not it really abolishes the state, you are welcome to take this to the LWDT.

Typical copout :^)

He's right though.

[The East Marches II]

Typical copout :^)

He's right though.

You are a bolshevik too as I've proven many times.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

He's right though.

You are a bolshevik too as I've proven many times.

The fuck did you just call me

[The East Marches II]

You are a bolshevik too as I've proven many times.

The fuck did you just call me

I called you what you are, you know that it is true

[Victoriala II]

You are a bolshevik too as I've proven many times.

The fuck did you just call me

welcome to the club amigo

[Lady Scylla]

Lead to? If you have private property, there already is one. Private property exists because the state enforces the property rights of it's owners.

I'm not arguing, as many do, that Ancapistan will produce a state. I'm arguing it never gets rid of it to begin with - it just changes the form of that state into a plutocracy.

What is the difference between a public police department and a privately owned one? Really only the name. Its no different than if your lot tried to get rid of the state, you would merely call it by a different name.

Security can only perform citizen arrest, can usually only observe & report, and can't typically use lethal force or even 'unarrest' people. They're not police, but they are private. PMCs on the otherhand are just illegal in general though the US, UK, Russia, and China never ratified the treaty involving that.

[Conscentia]

If you want to debate communism and whether or not it really abolishes the state, you are welcome to take this to the LWDT.

Typical copout :^)

You're the one copping out by not going the LWDT to fite me.

[The East Marches II]

Typical copout :^)

You're the one copping out by not going the LWDT to fite me.

Its RWDT related, this is as good as place as any to duel. :^)

[The East Marches II]

What is the difference between a public police department and a privately owned one? Really only the name. Its no different than if your lot tried to get rid of the state, you would merely call it by a different name.

Security can only perform citizen arrest, can usually only observe & report, and can't typically use lethal force or even 'unarrest' people. They're not police, but they are private. PMCs on the otherhand are just illegal in general though the US, UK, Russia, and China never ratified the treaty involving that.

Say you fired your local police department and went full ancap. If you were to hire a private firm, to fill the role of police with all their powers. Would it be practically different than a public one?

If only that were the case for the above. The break down of law and order in Chicago has led to buildings to get private security with the traditional powers. We're this close to going full dystopia. On a scale 1 to hype, how hyped are you?

[Neo Balka]

Security can only perform citizen arrest, can usually only observe & report, and can't typically use lethal force or even 'unarrest' people. They're not police, but they are private. PMCs on the otherhand are just illegal in general though the US, UK, Russia, and China never ratified the treaty involving that.

Say you fired your local police department and went full ancap. If you were to hire a private firm, to fill the role of police with all their powers. Would it be practically different than a public one?

If only that were the case for the above. The break down of law and order in Chicago has led to buildings to get private security with the traditional powers. We're this close to going full dystopia. On a scale 1 to hype, how hyped are you?

Chicago practically deserves to be walled off from the Civilized part of the midwest then.

[Lady Scylla]

Security can only perform citizen arrest, can usually only observe & report, and can't typically use lethal force or even 'unarrest' people. They're not police, but they are private. PMCs on the otherhand are just illegal in general though the US, UK, Russia, and China never ratified the treaty involving that.

Say you fired your local police department and went full ancap. If you were to hire a private firm, to fill the role of police with all their powers. Would it be practically different than a public one?

If only that were the case for the above. The break down of law and order in Chicago has led to buildings to get private security with the traditional powers. We're this close to going full dystopia. On a scale 1 to hype, how hyped are you?

Problem is that, AFAIK, you can't do that. And private security never gets traditional powers. Some states do license private security -- but they're still security. They're little more than citizens with firearms, handcuffs, OC Spray, a taser with the adequate training, but drowning in redtape on what they can, and cannot do. They're still subordinate to police, and can only enforce company policy on their property.

[KMS Prinz Eugen]

Private property is just a tautology.

Property exists independent of states.

Kingdoms are the private property of the sovereign.
Also prepare to be torpedoed.

[The East Marches II]

Say you fired your local police department and went full ancap. If you were to hire a private firm, to fill the role of police with all their powers. Would it be practically different than a public one?

If only that were the case for the above. The break down of law and order in Chicago has led to buildings to get private security with the traditional powers. We're this close to going full dystopia. On a scale 1 to hype, how hyped are you?

Problem is that, AFAIK, you can't do that. And private security never gets traditional powers. Some states do license private security -- but they're still security. They're little more than citizens with firearms, handcuffs, OC Spray, a taser with the adequate training, but drowning in redtape on what they can, and cannot do. They're still subordinate to police, and can only enforce company policy on their property.

Does Texas allow for corporate influence in law making. Uh I just want to know as a purely theoretical exercise.

[The East Marches II]

Say you fired your local police department and went full ancap. If you were to hire a private firm, to fill the role of police with all their powers. Would it be practically different than a public one?

If only that were the case for the above. The break down of law and order in Chicago has led to buildings to get private security with the traditional powers. We're this close to going full dystopia. On a scale 1 to hype, how hyped are you?

Chicago practically deserves to be walled off from the Civilized part of the midwest then.

It was a well to do person's building, the rest of the city doesn't have that (or much policing). It wasn't a bad place to live and it was admittedly pretty safe but the feeling of living in Dredd the movie wasn't what I was looking for.

They tried to round up the usual suspects this weekend. First time they've been out in force for a while. I hope it works well.

[Lady Scylla]

Problem is that, AFAIK, you can't do that. And private security never gets traditional powers. Some states do license private security -- but they're still security. They're little more than citizens with firearms, handcuffs, OC Spray, a taser with the adequate training, but drowning in redtape on what they can, and cannot do. They're still subordinate to police, and can only enforce company policy on their property.

Does Texas allow for corporate influence in law making. Uh I just want to know as a purely theoretical exercise.

Officially, no. The US is infected with lobbyism, however.

[Conscentia]

You're the one copping out by not going the LWDT to fite me.

Its RWDT related, this is as good as place as any to duel. :^)

Communism is not RWDT-related.

[The East Marches II]

Its RWDT related, this is as good as place as any to duel. :^)

Communism is not RWDT-related.

The topic of what a state practically is and your total hypocrisy in criticizing the ancaps is in your previous post is. Like I said, you resort to a copout because you know you can't win!

[Conscentia]

Communism is not RWDT-related.

The topic of what a state practically is and your total hypocrisy in criticizing the ancaps is in your previous post is. Like I said, you resort to a copout because you know you can't win!

I'm not copping out. I'll fite you on the LWDT. You are are the one copping out. Probably because you lost the last time we argued about the state.