Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
General Discussion / Re: Hoppe on ABC radio for anarcho-capitalism
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 11:59:38 am »
Michael still runs http://southernnationalist.com/blog/

You can email him at southernnationalist@yahoo.com.

I miss his views here but he got scrummed on occasion by other members.
22
General Discussion / Re: Hoppe on ABC radio for anarcho-capitalism
« Last post by afederalrepublican1776 on August 20, 2014, 11:39:06 am »
What ever happened to Palmetto P.?
23
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 10:24:50 am »


Sometimes I just want to scream at the injustice of it all.
24
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 10:18:58 am »
I thought this article was rather germane to the topic here:

Here's the thing -- even if the alternative(s) involve either intentionally driving yourself into privation or taking illegal action you still consented.  That the alternative is distasteful enough for you to refuse to act on it, irrespective of the reason, doesn't change the fact that you have given consent to all of the above and will do so again tomorrow.  It does not change the fact that each and every morning you arise from your sleep and once again give that consent.  You did so intentionally this morning, you will do so of your own free will tomorrow, and you will continue to do so in all probability every day next week, month and year.

His listing of daily evils visited on the tax cattle in the USSA is enough to make your head explode.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229316
25
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by Chris on August 20, 2014, 09:01:17 am »
To me, the topic of self defense goes hand-in-hand with the topic of aggression, because I believe that the self-defense principle is the exact inverse of the non-aggression principle...  aggression is never morally justified, but when it occurs, violence in self defense is always morally justified.  I may not always believe it to be the response that is the most rational, productive, or likely to produce a net positive value for my Self, but it is JUSTIFIED 100% of the time.  The principle has the same basis as the non-aggression principle... my status as a rational being possessed with volitional consciousness, who depends on the exercise of my reason and productive ability for survival. 

It is highly relevant to this discussion, because if you accept this principle, to say that violence is not necessarily justified in self defense is to say that no act of aggression has occurred.  This basic principle isn't concerned with the LEVEL of violence that is justified... that is another matter altogether.  But if voting is aggression, at least some level of violence is justified in self defense, whether a person chooses to act on it or not. 

Bill, how far do you think the culpability of voters goes?  Are they responsible for every single act of violence that any government employee commits?

Hensch, I hope you don't think that I was saying that. I was just trying to establish if voting was actually aggression before we proceeded with the conversation. Because if voting isn't aggression, then a conversation about self-defense is irrelevant.
26
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by henschman on August 20, 2014, 08:52:49 am »
I'll have to grok this but does this mean because the consequences of self-defense in this case seem philosophically disproportionate but necessary? What makes a voter different from a thief in the context of the involuntary surrender of your wealth and time through the proxies the voter legitimizes?
I wouldn't say "seemingly disproportionate but necessary"... I don't believe that self defense is necessary just because it is justified. 

As far as legitimization goes, voting isn't what legitimizes the acts of politicians and their hired guns, or allows them to get away with what they do... that is purely a result of people not forcibly stopping them.  But voting is not the same as failing to stop government aggression... it is possible to both cast a vote in an election, and kill whoever wins, and/or the thugs he sends to do his bidding. 
27
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 08:43:26 am »
Quote
It is highly relevant to this discussion, because if you accept this principle, to say that violence is not necessarily justified in self defense is to say that no act of aggression has occurred.  This basic principle isn't concerned with the LEVEL of violence that is justified... that is another matter altogether.  But if voting is justified, at least some level of violence is justified in self defense, whether a person chooses to act on it or not.

I'll have to grok this but does this mean because the consequences of self-defense in this case seem philosophically disproportionate but necessary? What makes a voter different from a thief in the context of the involuntary surrender of your wealth and time through the proxies the voter legitimizes?
28
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by henschman on August 20, 2014, 08:38:48 am »
To me, the topic of self defense goes hand-in-hand with the topic of aggression, because I believe that the self-defense principle is the exact inverse of the non-aggression principle...  aggression is never morally justified, but when it occurs, violence in self defense is always morally justified.  I may not always believe it to be the response that is the most rational, productive, or likely to produce a net positive value for my Self, but it is JUSTIFIED 100% of the time.  The principle has the same basis as the non-aggression principle... my status as a rational being possessed with volitional consciousness, who depends on the exercise of my reason and productive ability for survival. 

It is highly relevant to this discussion, because if you accept this principle, to say that violence is not necessarily justified in self defense is to say that no act of aggression has occurred.  This basic principle isn't concerned with the LEVEL of violence that is justified... that is another matter altogether.  But if voting is aggression, at least some level of violence is justified in self defense, whether a person chooses to act on it or not. 

Bill, how far do you think the culpability of voters goes?  Are they responsible for every single act of violence that any government employee commits?
29
General Discussion / Re: Hoppe on ABC radio for anarcho-capitalism
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 08:30:15 am »
That post is ancient.
30
General Discussion / Re: Voting
« Last post by Bill on August 20, 2014, 08:27:05 am »
Quote
This cannot be shown, because applying a marker to a piece of paper doesn't force anyone to do anything.

Yet, in the US system, this is the very means by which the entire system sets into motion its police enforcements mechanism which are the teeth of the slave system here. The vote seems banal yet the signing of warrants or executive orders are by fiat an extension of the legitimacy granted to elected officials in the ballot box. Whether the pen is wielded by the voter or the political actor, it all ends the same unlike a consensual contract.

So I am with ML, voting is clearly an act or least acknowledgement of consent to aggression against your neighbor or strangers.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10