Uneducated Police

[Caninope]

How would that be judged?

Whoever has the nicest hat on.

If that's it, then I am wearing my sombrero.

[Katganistan]

And there is why the social contract exists. You remain in a place with facilities and services that make it so that you don't have to work from sun-up to sundown to subsist, and in exchange for accepting the help, you accept the rules and regulations that go with it -- or you go somewhere with rules and regulations that you find more palatable.

With all due respect, do you plan on EVER accurately representing my opinion? Or do you just enjoy building strawmen and then knocking them down? I am not a communist. I have literally NO idea where you get this idea from, that I somehow am advocating the destruction of "facilities and services", and creating a subsistence economy. I literally have NO IDEA where you got this out of ANYTHING I have said. You either are getting this from a mistaken stigma that somehow all anarchists are communists, or you have not read anything on this topic about my suggested alternatives to government services.

Now you make a reference to me "accepting the help". Please enlighten me as to how I have accepted anything? You realize that I quite literally never had anything offered to me right? It wasn't offered to me, because that would mean I had an option to turn it down, which of course I didn't. When I was born, I did not pick where to live. I did not have a choice whether or not to accept this governments jurisdiction over me. There is no place on Earth that can sustain life, where I find the rules and regulations palatable. I think, personally, it is a weak argument to make that the answer to my problem is to kill myself.

t seems you'd rather have it all your way -- take advantage of the benefits and deny the responsibilities.

This is a statement that somebody that literally has zero knowledge of my actual argument would make. I am not expecting that by removing taxation, somehow government services will still be provided.. Im not saying that some magical public service that isn't funded in any way will pump out food. In this way, I am not trying to take advantage of any benefits and deny the responsibilities. I am saying that these services should be operated by the private sector. In that scenario, where the private sector controls the services, I have no repsonsibility to them at all, unless of course it benefits me to subscribe to their services.

Excuse YOU? Where did I call you a communist, or say that you wanted to destroy services? YOU'RE the one constructing strawmen. You asked if you should move to the artic and die, I said this is why we have a social contract -- the services and facilities that make it possible for you not to spend your life in subsistence are there, and you agree to play if you use them.

Now stop pulling stuff out of ass-space and actually answer what's said to you, not what you WISH we'd said. And yes, if you want to take the benefits of the facilities and deny that that means you've agreed to the responsibilities that go with them, you HAVE in fact, made that argument.

[Katganistan]

Well, you know, the Microsoft Army has been shooting Linuxers for years now.

What keeps a private defense firm from emerging now to compete with the U.S. government? Because the government has regulations to prevent this from occuring. You, quite literally, will be shot if you attempt to set up a competitor. Apply this same principle to every other field, where it may not be as clear and outright of a regulatory ban, but still rigorous regulations you must comply with. Not complying with regulations would mean, well. Your going to get a gun pointed at your head.

Really? Then where is it? Where are these private defense firms, and why are we not at gunpoint?
Because except in your fantasy, THEY DON'T EXIST.

[Katganistan]

Isn't it funny that a poster who says he'll "humiliate" anyone who tries to debate him 1 on 1, conveniently ignores the challenge to prove it? All you've done was throw out a random question, in the same open (hardly "1 on 1" thread, without defining the topic, rules, or parameters. You were asked to set your terms, and the topic of the debate. You're remain remarkably silent.

Fucking pathetic.

Giving you a hypothetical scenario to refute is a valid form of debate. Tell me a way to make a 1v1 thread on here and ill do it.

I'll do it for you. I'll close this thread, and you can start another one entitled "Anarcho-Capitalism: A Closed Debate between Neo Art and Bendira."
I doubt very, very highly you'll go for it, however.

[Lauchlin]

I don't know why any of us are still bothering here. He just refuses to acknolwedge any line of argument that he can't refute.

I feel like I should know better, but I keep coming back to read the thread.

[Jervak]

Damn I missed Anarcho-Cappie rage debate. This will be fun. *reads thread*

[Katganistan]

Debate thread is open and waiting.

[Dododecapod]

security/defence company might provide a good starting point, indeed, but it wouldn't be absolutely necessary. Private armies are not difficult to form, nor train, nor use - all you really need is a cause, or a charismatic leader, or just out and out wealth. This is what I meant by power being transferrable - once you have one kind, using it to get another is reasonably easy. And the very system you espouse provides for singular individuals attaining high levels of economic power.

I will not disagree that such a scenario is impossible, but idk how I feel about your assertion that it would be easy to form a private army. Especially a private army capable of consolodating an entire society through warfare. This group would have to have a huge backing, and voluntary funding. Although this obviously would unravel the system, you could say the same thing could unravel ours. My point is, although this is a valid point, this catastrophic failure theory is not unique to anarcho-capitalism. This could occur in any system I can think of.

Private armies have proven quite easy to found in the past, in those locations where it has been permitted to occur. The full-scale street battles between the SA (Sturmabteilung, the Nazi Party's private force) and those of the German Communist and Anarchist parties in the Weimar Republic are well documented. More to the point, military forces in the Civil War were often formed by wealthy individuals before becoming official parts of the Union or Confederate militaries. There's always someone willing to fight for a cause, or a man, or to get away - or just for three square meals a day.

And while private armies are indeed a threat to ANY governmental system, Anarcho Capitalism IS unique in both A) promoting the opportunity for them to exist and B)having no institutional defence against them. A_C contains and promotes what will destroy it.

[Andaluciae]

So I am a voluntaryist?

Why do you need the 'y' in that word? It makes the word so incredibly awkward. I think Voluntarist would be far more pleasing to speak and hear.

[Farnhamia]

So I am a voluntaryist?

Why do you need the 'y' in that word? It makes the word so incredibly awkward. I think Voluntarist would be far more pleasing to speak and hear.

I agree but apparently the school of philosophy or economics or whatever is actually called "Voluntaryism" and a follower of it is a "voluntaryist." Go figure.

[Hydesland]

I've never even heard of Voluntaryism until recently, it seems to be exactly the same as a whole load of other schools of thought.

[Farnhamia]

I've never even heard of Voluntaryism until recently, it seems to be exactly the same as a whole load of other schools of thought.

I've always wondered, could you actually really build a tower of ivory? I mean, if you think elephants are endangered now!

[Andaluciae]

Why do you need the 'y' in that word? It makes the word so incredibly awkward. I think Voluntarist would be far more pleasing to speak and hear.

I agree but apparently the school of philosophy or economics or whatever is actually called "Voluntaryism" and a follower of it is a "voluntaryist." Go figure.

Guh. It burnses my earses. It burnses like flaming gasoline burnination in the earses.

[Brandenburg-Altmark]

I've never even heard of Voluntaryism until recently, it seems to be exactly the same as a whole load of other schools of thought.

I've always wondered, could you actually really build a tower of ivory? I mean, if you think elephants are endangered now!

But wouldn't the elephants have to agree to this violation of their natural rights first? If you gather that ivory, your rights become void for breaching the rights of another, eh? I wonder how they manage...

[Farnhamia]

I've always wondered, could you actually really build a tower of ivory? I mean, if you think elephants are endangered now!

But wouldn't the elephants have to agree to this violation of their natural rights first? If you gather that ivory, your rights become void for breaching the rights of another, eh? I wonder how they manage...

I think you just shoot the elephants. No, wait ...

[Caninope]

But wouldn't the elephants have to agree to this violation of their natural rights first? If you gather that ivory, your rights become void for breaching the rights of another, eh? I wonder how they manage...

I think you just shoot the elephants. No, wait ...

You have a little Orwell in your future.

[Panzerjaeger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBeT4ptY9sY

I couldn't help myself.