Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would you volunteer to be a slave in that scenario?
Volunteer has nothing to do with it. Slavery is a manifestation of force over will. Something we understand even today. Save Slavery is a most forceful application of force. Like the Soviet Penal camp experience to a generation who is still alive understands.
Everyone accepts slavery in this country. We enslave others when we "vote" to use government violence and coercion to impose our personal will upon our neighbor. We enslave ourselves when we pay taxes or use the magic green toilet paper we call "dollars". We enslave ourselves when we "consent" to government extortion and "services" because we are afraid of government aggression. We enslave ourselves when we "pay" to exercise natural human rights, that "our" government have transformed into "privileges"...
Volunteer has nothing to do with it. Slavery is a manifestation of force over will. Something we understand even today. Save Slavery is a most forceful application of force. Like the Soviet Penal camp experience to a generation who is still alive understands.
Are there really people in America who have no concept of the reality of life from 1600-1865?
How many of us would turn away using slaves if we had to raise cash crops in the 1700s. Considering what life was like-none of us would refuse.
Then I return to these statement and say that no one HAD to raise cash crops in the south and no one HAD to own slaves, Those seem to be spurious arguments used to excuse the apparent disregard for the reality of slavery?
No matter how you slice it and no matter what time-frame. Slavery was and is an immoral institution that people should not just cast off as if it were no big deal. That is what BO'R was doing and that why people here in this thread arguing that is was not that bad, not that important, and no longer relevant need to take a deep look inside their soul - if they can find it.
Alright, how about this deal. Explain (defend/rationalize/justify, etc.) why Ron Paul wouldn’t have voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act because it was unfair to property owners?
All I said was I agreed with Spooner's anti-slavery stance and you correctly pointed out his cognitive dissonance when he dabbled in statist matters.
That's a common problem for anarchists in Spooner's time as well as today: trying to convince statists of the moral/rational logic of anarchy without dipping our feet into the statist pool.
I said I agreed with many of Spooner's principles. And that's still true. Aside from your point about Spooner (which I disagree with him on simply from an anti-State position) I also disagree with him on intellectual property rights (I like Rothbard's ideas much more but not 100% there either).
My point is still the same: new technologies, new ideas, and exposure to more information have generally made comparing/contrasting ideologies/stances from era to era a tough job.
Look at how you and I both view taxes (and correct me if I'm wrong at some point here). I believe taxes to be theft and in fact...slavery. You don't. You see taxes as the price of living in a "civilized" society Obviously your position is much more widely accepted today...MUCH more.
Well, in 100 years what if people swing my way? Will you be known as an evil pro-slavery person?
Would you volunteer to be a slave in that scenario?
"Volunteering" to be a slave would in fact make you an employee.
Volunteers can quit. Slaves can't (which is why we are all slaves today...though of a less harsh paradigm in terms of physical conditions among other things).
States have a monopoly on force. The government's monopoly creates/impacts all social conditions. And here you'll find Spooner's better ideas on the slavery issue of his time.
All I said was I agreed with Spooner's anti-slavery stance and you correctly pointed out his cognitive dissonance when he dabbled in statist matters.
That's a common problem for anarchists in Spooner's time as well as today: trying to convince statists of the moral/rational logic of anarchy without dipping our feet into the statist pool.
I said I agreed with many of Spooner's principles. And that's still true. Aside from your point about Spooner (which I disagree with him on simply from an anti-State position) I also disagree with him on intellectual property rights (I like Rothbard's ideas much more but not 100% there either).
My point is still the same: new technologies, new ideas, and exposure to more information have generally made comparing/contrasting ideologies/stances from era to era a tough job.
Look at how you and I both view taxes (and correct me if I'm wrong at some point here). I believe taxes to be theft and in fact...slavery. You don't. You see taxes as the price of living in a "civilized" society Obviously your position is much more widely accepted today...MUCH more.
Well, in 100 years what if people swing my way? Will you be known as an evil pro-slavery person?
I think the folks in the future will be way more baffled by all of the statues of the Confederate 'heroes'. Only around for what? 4 years? & imagine the surprise when they link the 'Cornerstone speech, CSA Constitution, et cetera, ad nauseum to these guys.
"Volunteering" to be a slave would in fact make you an employee.
Volunteers can quit. Slaves can't (which is why we are all slaves today...though of a less harsh paradigm in terms of physical conditions among other things).
Quote:
...
Nozick's uncompromising statement of the libertarian credo represents something of a watershed in modern social and moral philosophy because of its explicit acceptance of voluntary contractual slavery. ...
& listen, please, all of this libertarian bs is so not reality-based. The mental masturbation techniques involved were old more than three decades ago. So disconnected to reality! As well as dragging this thread off topic so libertarian, an-caps, etc. can do what?
I mean why not not bring up Larken Rose's 'When Should You Shoot a Cop?' while we're at it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
