On the issue of Free Speech

[guerilla]

as history demonstrates that full-blown anarchy very quickly descends into tribal culture

Which history was this?

where there will almost always be a group bigger than yours, who could take your possessions on a whim.

I don't think this is proven.

Also, for the sake of clarification, could you state your preferred sect of anarchism?

I am a voluntarist. I believe the only rational and efficient economic system is one based on cooperation.

You don'y claim to be you just assume the role

Well, then you assume the role. You're obviously super intelligent.

I'm not going to point out everyone else's version of what they claim a right is.

Maybe because you can't. Learn to read before you try to take me on for thinking, because right now, you look like a pretty big idiot.

 

[jonas33h]

I don't want to police people's opinions you do. I don't want to assume that role you do. I pointed out one comment were you say that's not a right it's a privilege, why am I the idiot for you telling people what is and isn't a right?

 

[guerilla]

I don't want to police people's opinions you do.

I don't care about opinions, I only care about facts. Hence definitions, and whether they make sense.

I pointed out one comment were you say that's not a right it's a privilege

I pointed out that his definition of a right was consistent with the definition of a privilege.

why am I the idiot

By this time, that should be obvious amigo.

 

[jonas33h]

again you made yourself the authority. . . and I'm the idiot.

That was my whole argument that you dismiss shit based off of nothing or simply throw a question mark at the end of a word and say define it that's real intelligent. . . lulz

oh and prove that anarchy works instead of saying prove that it doesn't. . .

 

[guerilla]

I'm the idiot.

This we agree upon.

That was my whole argument that you dismiss shit based off of nothing

Where did I do this?

or simply throw a question mark at the end of a word and say define it that's real intelligent. . . lulz

If I don't have a clear definition, how can I be sure I know what the other person means, without assuming?

oh and prove that anarchy works instead of saying prove that it doesn't. . .

Define "works".

 

[jonas33h]

lulz- works. . . sorry boy genius if you don't know hot to define that in the proper context your to dumb to get an answer out of.

 

[guerilla]

lulz- works. . . sorry boy genius if you don't know hot to define that in the proper context your to dumb to get an answer out of.

So you can't or won't define your terms. Sure makes it hard to have a discussion with you in that case.

For the record, I don't claim "anarchism works". Whether it works or not is largely irrelevant. The current system is immoral and counter-productive to the aims of peace and prosperity.

Anarchism is a system consistent with morality and property, and thus I think, quite superior to what we have today.

 

[jonas33h]

^ that is the problem I have with anarchy though morality. . . I consider myself to be moral and you may as well but murders rapist and pedophiles may also consider them to be so as well or not care and with out law how do you handle that

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

The current system is immoral and counter-productive to the aims of peace and prosperity.

Define "immoral".

Anarchism is a system consistent with morality and property, and thus I think, quite superior to what we have today.

Define "superior".

 

[guerilla]

^ that is the problem I have with anarchy though morality. . . I consider myself to be moral and you may as well but murders rapist and pedophiles may also consider them to be so as well or not care and with out law how do you handle that

Anarchy is not the absence of law. Anarchy is a polycentric (competitive) legal order.

Any time two legal orders intersect, there has to be some negotiation.

This happens when a Japanese business sells something to someone in Brazil, or an American goes on vacation to China. Two different legal systems, two different sets of cultural norms.

Right now, we're limited in our legal choices, price of legal systems, enforcement costs by large violent monopolies based on geography. In the future, people will get legal representation based on their individual choices rather than the de facto group they are born in to.

 

[lukep]

ITT: Guerilla showing us all exactly why he went missing from WF for weeks recently.


@Joe: Anarchy historically hasn't worked out that well because it's always been in close proximity to its' arch nemesis: Governments.

That's why we need to build a seastead to go the fuck out into international waters just to be able to EXPERIMENT with an Anarcho-Capitalistic society. You just can't get some land here and do it or the local government will see it as a thread and obliterate it, every single time.

So please don't use historical examples to 'prove' that anarchy can't work... Most anarchists fully concede that it can't work in close proximity to a government... So you're not able to provide an example of something that never existed.

 

[guerilla]

Define "immoral".

The initiation of force.

Define "superior".

Better than.

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

The initiation of force.

Define "force".

Better than.

In what way?

 

[guerilla]

Define "force".

Unwanted physical contact against person or property.

In what way?

With regards to morality and property.

 

[jonas33h]

I agree that freedom of speech should be respected even if the person disagrees with the opinion. The bashing should stop.

bashing is fun and leads to enlightenment. this back and forth between me and guerrilla will definitely result in me learning something new.

 

[lukep]

@jonas: You know you're talking to a bot, right?

 

[jonas33h]

i do now...

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

Unwanted physical contact against person or property.

So is your position that force can only be physical?

With regards to morality and property.

Is theft immoral, even if physical force isn't used?

 

[guerilla]

So is your position that force can only be physical?

Physical force is what I am talking about.

Is theft immoral, even if physical force isn't used?

Of course it is.

 

[johnmatrix]

Homer : What does "sequestered" mean?
Skinner : If the jury is deadlocked they're put up in a hotel together
so they can't communicate with the outside world.
Homer : What does "deadlocked" mean?
Skinner : It's when the jury can't agree on a verdict.
Homer : Uh huh. And "if"?
Skinner : A conjunction meaning "in the event that" or "on condition
that".