Would Slavery Exist in the Ideal Minarchical Society?

[The New Communist Order]

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think? Ultimately, I believe slavery would exist as there is no definite way to define who or what would be a citizen in this society, yet my mind is open and my opinion is subject to change on this topic.

[Talo Imperium]

As it is little more than a legitimation of an archipelago of allied petty tyrannies, I can't see why not.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No.

[Combine City-17]

No.

/thread

[The New Communist Order]

No.

Reasoning?

[The Federation of Kendor]

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think?

Can you add your opinion on your opening post. Because if there is no opinion by the creator of a thread in General, then it will get locked

[Gyrenaica]

No.

Reasoning?

It violates the NAP

[Washington Resistance Army]

No.

Reasoning?

Well, it violates the NAP for one.

What reason would there be for slavery to be allowed to exist?

[Martian Socialist Republics]

Yes, all would be slaves to the Capitalist system.

[Polish Theocracy of Joakim]

Yes, all would be slaves to the Capitalist system.

Be quiet, Capitalism is not slavery. What you are thinking is corporatism.

[The Blue Flag Republic]

Yes, all would be slaves to the Capitalist system.

Be quiet, Capitalism is not slavery. What you are thinking is corporatism.

Well, since both contribute to a societal situation where people have to work for others at ends they don't like, go on the dole, or die I see no difference.

[Polish Theocracy of Joakim]

Be quiet, Capitalism is not slavery. What you are thinking is corporatism.

Well, since both contribute to a societal situation where people have to work for others at ends they don't like, go on the dole, or die I see no difference.

What the hell are you talking about? This is just pure gibberish

[The Federation of Kendor]

Be quiet, Capitalism is not slavery. What you are thinking is corporatism.

Well, since both contribute to a societal situation where people have to work for others at ends they don't like, go on the dole, or die I see no difference.

So you are saying capitalism have things like exploitation, wage slavery, and consumerism

[The Blue Flag Republic]

Well, since both contribute to a societal situation where people have to work for others at ends they don't like, go on the dole, or die I see no difference.

So you are saying capitalism have things like exploitation, wage slavery, and consumerism

Yes.

[Polish Theocracy of Joakim]

So you are saying capitalism have things like exploitation, wage slavery, and consumerism

Yes.

Words cannot describe how idiotic this is

[The Federation of Kendor]

Yes.

Words cannot describe how idiotic this is

What do you mean? Are you saying capitalism doesn't mean things like that, and it actually does because of some corrupt or greedy individuals

[Polish Theocracy of Joakim]

Words cannot describe how idiotic this is

What do you mean? Are you saying capitalism doesn't mean things like that, and it actually does because of some corrupt or greedy individuals

I doesn't, I was calling him idiotic for believing that falsehood

[Grenartia]

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think? Ultimately, I believe slavery would exist as there is no definite way to define who or what would be a citizen in this society, yet my mind is open and my opinion is subject to change on this topic.

If legislation isn't a duty delegated to the state, then how would anybody's rights be able to be protected? The lawmaking process is delegated to the "free" market, and thus, no policy will be kept if it ceases to be profitable.

To say nothing of the fact that the classic Minarchist slogan of "the ideal government is one that's too small to see", logically means its too small to do anything, even within its scope.

[The Blue Flag Republic]

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think? Ultimately, I believe slavery would exist as there is no definite way to define who or what would be a citizen in this society, yet my mind is open and my opinion is subject to change on this topic.

If legislation isn't a duty delegated to the state, then how would anybody's rights be able to be protected? The lawmaking process is delegated to the "free" market, and thus, no policy will be kept if it ceases to be profitable.

To say nothing of the fact that the classic Minarchist slogan of "the ideal government is one that's too small to see", logically means its too small to do anything, even within its scope.

J E N N I F E R G O V E R N M E N T?
E
N
N
I
F
E
R

G
O
V
E
R
N
M
E
N
T
?

[The Federation of Kendor]

Minarchism is a form of Libertarianism, with the philosophy that the ideal government would exist to provide only a few necessary services to the people. It often limits the State to three institutions, that could not be handled properly by the free market, the military, the police, and the courts. The actions that these three institutions would provide would be to protect citizens from aggression, and protect their property laws and natural rights. Now, I go back and forth between whether or not slavery would exist in this ideal Minarchical society, as the government would ideally protect citizens' natural rights to life, liberty and, property, and therefore, society would not allow slavery. Yet, this line of thinking becomes problematic, because who/what would decide who is a citizen and who is not? I go back and forth in my mind and was wondering what you guys think? Ultimately, I believe slavery would exist as there is no definite way to define who or what would be a citizen in this society, yet my mind is open and my opinion is subject to change on this topic.

If legislation isn't a duty delegated to the state, then how would anybody's rights be able to be protected? The lawmaking process is delegated to the "free" market, and thus, no policy will be kept if it ceases to be profitable.

To say nothing of the fact that the classic Minarchist slogan of "the ideal government is one that's too small to see", logically means its too small to do anything, even within its scope.

So, Minarchism will release the worst of capitalism. And why do you sau free market is "free" market

[Grenartia]

Yes.

Words cannot describe how idiotic this is

How is it idiotic to say that a capitalist society has the things it requires to work? You can't have capitalism without exploitation (of which wage slavery is an integral part). And capitalism depends on consumerism. Its like saying its idiotic to say that a democracy has elections.

[Saiwania]

Slavery has existed since the beginning of civilization independently of any governmental system. I'd say it primarily if not exclusively, was caused by economic forces at work. Once factories and machines could produce far more than people, and the value of manual labor plummeted to account for less and less- over time slavery became obsolete for most of the entire world. It was not ended only out of the kindness of people's hearts.

For most of recorded history anyways, it was economically more viable to put at least some people to work doing all manner of physical labor and tasks and not pay them or do just the bare minimum to feed and clothe slaves, which could be seen as both an asset and a liability so far as property goes.

[The Federation of Kendor]

Words cannot describe how idiotic this is

How is it idiotic to say that a capitalist society has the things it requires to work? You can't have capitalism without exploitation (of which wage slavery is an integral part). And capitalism depends on consumerism. Its like saying its idiotic to say that a democracy has elections.

So if we want to bring equality and better life to people, then communism and socialism are the answer

[Grenartia]

If legislation isn't a duty delegated to the state, then how would anybody's rights be able to be protected? The lawmaking process is delegated to the "free" market, and thus, no policy will be kept if it ceases to be profitable.

To say nothing of the fact that the classic Minarchist slogan of "the ideal government is one that's too small to see", logically means its too small to do anything, even within its scope.

1. So, Minarchism will release the worst of capitalism. 2. And why do you sau free market is "free" market

1. Much like an attack dog that's not kept on a leash, yes.

2. Because its not free if the bourgeoisie are allowed to dominate and coerce the workers.

[The East Marches II]

You've not gone full Hoppe so of course it won't exist. Gooby pls.