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.
I am the government. Each statist in this thread is required to pay me a tribute of $10 via PayPal. This payment must be made daily. The only way out is to pay an exit fee of $5 also via PayPal.
If you choose to pay the exit fee and leave my government you must sign a document saying that you are no longer a subject to the Government of No_Recess.
*clicks on PayPal account waiting for the tribute to roll in*
What do I get in return? If I can pay you $10 a day and you will build me a road to work and lights to light my way, O.K.
The state doesn't have a monopoly on the use of force. In many places, you can legally kill an intruder in your home and you will face no punishment from the state for doing so. In some states, you can kill a person in a public place if that person threatens your life. That is a high degree of legal autonomy for the greatest use of force there is.
In all states you have the right to self defense. That's not what we're discussing. What we're discussing is the state can initiate the use of force without repercussions. Woe betide the citizen who defends themselves. There are myriad examples of this like Wounded Knee to Ruby Ridge, to say nothing of those who did not like West Coast Japanese origin citizens interred during WW2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supachai
You can't expect to be part of a statist system and have no obligations to the state. The US has legal obligations to its citizens, whether they are abroad or in the country. I am a dual citizen, so I understand that US tax laws are burdensome. If I ever decide to move out of the country, I will have to decide whether to renounce my US citizenship and lose the benefits that citizenship brings.
The point is: You CAN renounce your citizenship. Many do it every year and there is a record number of persons renouncing their US citizenship.
Why must I be part of a statist system when I had no option to choose to join and little option to leave?
Do you understand you must obtain permission to renounce your citizenship of the US. There is no requirement for the State Department to accept your application. Even further it does not free you from pursuit of the IRS. So you can renounce at the whim of the state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supachai
It all goes back to choice. The argument that you don't have one isn't valid. It's hypocrisy to point fingers at the "statists" and accuse them of holding you back all while you choose to live as part of the statist system. Is it simple to leave? No, but that's a weak argument. Striking it out on your own is always going to be hard, but if you want true independence, then it can be done.
Of course its a valid argument. Look suppose you were born in prison to prisoner parents, who's sole option for release is to request it from the prison administration. That prison administration requires you have another prison that will accept you as an inmate before leaving and it's at your prisons discretion anyway. What actual choice do you have as that prisoner? I mean you can have a desire, or a dream, but what choice do you have pragmatically of release from prison?
Do you think rights just come down from the universe and are imbued into human beings by some magical force?
Rights are just abstract ideas about what we are free to do that we have collectively agreed upon. If we have a right to free speech, it's only because our fellow citizens have agreed that we can say what we want. It's only the threat of force that allows us to keep this right. If someone violates my right to free speech, I can try to get my fellow citizens to use their collective force to punish the party that violated my right. It's this threat of force and actual use of force which allows us to maintain our rights.
Rights are an abstract idea, yes. I really don't even like saying you "have" rights, because rights are just a moral statement. If you have the right to not be mugged, it just means it's wrong for other people to mug you. I don't believe that if everyone gets together and says "you don't have the right to keep what you earn", that that makes them morally justified in taking it from you, for example.
We agree that force is needed to stop people from violating your rights.
Quote:
As for your example of walking down the street in peace, you have no such right. If you go onto another person's property then he can use force to get you off his property. He might even take your money. Doesn't he have a right to defend his property? You would probably agree that he does. Did he violate your rights by taking your money? You might think so, but doesn't he deserve payment for your transgression against him? If he is allowed to beat you up then why shouldn't he be able to take your money too? Some would think that crosses the line; others wouldn't.
The point that I'm making is that these are all just abstract ideas. We decide what is allowable and what isn't through discussion and consensus.
I never said anything about going onto someone else's property. I said walking down the street, assuming it was an area open to the public.
Quote:
I'm not obligated to do anything for you. If you are against being a part of a statist system, then leaving is a real option. Apparently, it's not so burdensome to you that you feel the need to leave. Instead, you demand to be left alone. What does leaving you alone even entail? You want to pay no taxes yet drive on public roads and use a system that you don't contribute to?
In other words, you want to live in your parents' house and ignore their rules. That's not going to work. If you want to stay, then you have to live by the rules that have been set. Otherwise, pack up and move out. Complaining that there is nowhere to go is petulant and short-sighted, much like a grown man who doesn't want to leave his parents' house because he knows that it will be difficult.
Maybe this anarchist society that you dream of doesn't exist because others who share your views are also too scared to move?
Ha, that's funny. You think that "society" or the government is the rightful owner of everything within it's borders? You must if you're claiming that I'm living in their house. Otherwise I can tell you "get off my property and leave me alone".
Leaving me alone entails not initiating force against me and not violating my property rights. Don't do it to others either. Let them offer alternative services so I'm not stuck with the government version or nothing, and stop forcing me to pay for stuff just because YOU want it.
Quote:
That's a poor analogy. The bully is acting outside of the framework of the school rules. In your analogy, the bully is not the state. The school is. The school would punish the bully. The bully might be expelled, allowing you to go to class in peace. The school would use their greater force to protect you. If there were no school administration and no rules, much like the anarchist society you want, then it would be up to you to defend yourself. If the bully was bigger than you and you couldn't beat him, then you'd have to convince other kids to join up with you to take him out. If all your friends were weaklings, then tough luck. You'd get beat every day.
Fine, let's say the people working at the school are abusive as well as some of the other kids. Same question... He should quit school, and by going to school he's choosing to be bullied?
And with the "you want no rules" thing...it's like you're purposely misunderstanding just to waste my time.
Also, I noticed the fence on your property is 7-ft tall.
Max height in No_Recess Land for a fence is 6-ft.
$10 daily fine until compliance is met.
I ask for valid alternatives and all I get are these false equivalencies. I've never argued for someone to be able to determine the height of your fence.
You condemn them but are unable to come up with a viable workable alternative.
I ask for valid alternatives and all I get are these false equivalencies. I've never argued for someone to be able to determine the height of your fence.
You condemn them but are unable to come up with a viable workable alternative.
This is workable.
That guy we're paying to sit on his porch like Frank noted...he likes this alternative. He's fat and happy.
You entered into this agreement at birth. You consent by not leaving.
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.
