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.
If you were born enslaved and there was means to free yourself from that slavery then you either take action and free yourself or cry about it like a little child. You've chosen option number two.
So you're saying that if I renounce citizenship the U.S. government or any other government will never bother me again?
They might. They might also turn those weapons on each other, much like gangs do today. Instead of drive-by shootings, we could have drive-by nukings. Lovely.
This sounds a lot to me like what is generally referred to as magical thinking. Please explain to me how simply not believing in a thing makes that thing go away. Has this worked for you so far?
It doesn't "make it go away". It can take the power away from it.
A child is real. A child's tantrum to eat cookies for dinner is real. The grievance is only as legitimate as you want it to be.
The belief in legitimate authority is in your head. If you stopped believing in it tomorrow the government would go on with its rituals, edicts, processes, etc. despite you knowing it has no legitimate authority over you.
I love competing to make my life better. I use "money" as the thing that allows me to take care of the people I need to.
You're actually onto something (by accident of course being a liberal Statist ) when it comes to some kind of currency being a sustainable model of exchange.
There's a long lost AnCap poster in here, irspow (awesome name ), who used to talk about a voluntary exchange of goods and services based on some sort of "time currency". Meaning you get certain time considerations in exchange for your labor/product because time is basically the most valuable resource, by default, for all of us since nobody lives forever.
It's an interesting idea IMO.
Ideas are what we need too. I break the balls of you Statists a lot but part of that is because we need your guys and your ideas to make it work. Relying on the government to think and do things for you is a hard habit to break. I still do it from time to time...mainly out of exhaustion of dealing with the government itself. It can be done though.
If that is true, how about being a bit less harsh with your criticism? I've been accused a few times, either directly or otherwise, of being a thief and a murderer because I vote. That's a bit...alienating. My problem is not that I am an immoral person, it's that I'm trying to sort this all out. I understand the importance of property rights, and I agree there is a problem with taking from people who don't want to give. The thing is, I think lives are more important than property, and I think there is also a problem with allowing people to go hungry or die because they lack resources, and in a purely free-market system, that would surely happen, would it not? I'm conflicted, not because I don't think for myself, but because I do.
So you're saying that if I renounce citizenship the U.S. government or any other government will never bother me again?
If you are captured and escape, your captors might come looking for you. What you are saying is that it's not worth escaping because of that reason. Your plan is to not even try to escape but to complain about your imprisonment to other people who you also believe to be imprisoned. The others point you to the open door but you then complain about how unfair it is that you should even have to escape since you didn't ask to be captured. Day after day, you complain about being captured but don't do anything to free yourself. After a while, no one takes you seriously. It's become clear to everyone that you don't really want to be free.
It doesn't "make it go away". It can take the power away from it.
A child is real. A child's tantrum to eat cookies for dinner is real. The grievance is only as legitimate as you want it to be.
The belief in legitimate authority is in your head. If you stopped believing in it tomorrow the government would go on with its rituals, edicts, processes, etc. despite you knowing it has no legitimate authority over you.
Let's say somehow the government was abolished, and everything was absolutely free market.
What would prevent powerful companies such as Amazon/Google/Microsoft/Apple/etc from merging together and buying up all the land in the US, and then enacting their own system of government that everyone would then have to obey, since their property = their rules.
As for the argument, "not enough people would be willing to sell their property to anyone", they could quickly buy everything that isn't a private residence and given that most people have to leave the house once in a while to live, most would still be under the rule of Microoglamapple (or whatever lol) at least some of the time.
Wouldn't we then be back to square 1, just with a different form of government that might be even more oppressive than the current system? (If you can imagine it! )
Let's not say government was abolished. Why don't you explain to us An-Caps why this doesn't happen now? Specifically which government agencies, branches and statutes prohibits both that conglomerate happening, and it behaving as you suggest. By prohibit I mean the law prohibits, not that there's some discretionary choice made that may be corrupted by a trillion dollar net profit conglomerate.
If that is true, how about being a bit less harsh with your criticism? I've been accused a few times, either directly or otherwise, of being a thief and a murderer because I vote. That's a bit...alienating. My problem is not that I am an immoral person, it's that I'm trying to sort this all out. I understand the importance of property rights, and I agree there is a problem with taking from people who don't want to give. The thing is, I think lives are more important than property, and I think there is also a problem with allowing people to go hungry or die because they lack resources, and in a purely free-market system, that would surely happen, would it not? I'm conflicted, not because I don't think for myself, but because I do.
Anarcho-Capitalists have a lot in common with Social Justice Warriors. They like to paint themselves as victims and claim that they're morally superior to others. Yet, they live a lifestyle that isn't really any different from the "statists" that they claim are so evil. Based on their actions, they are really statists themselves. They are looking for belonging but want to feel a sense of distinction apart from the mainstream. Watch the way they talk to each other as if they are somehow part of an elite group. Their insults to you are just their way of inflating their egos. I've seen some call others who don't support their views, "Normies." They are actually a lot like bronies. I'm sure many wear fedoras.
If you are captured and escape, your captors might come looking for you. What you are saying is that it's not worth escaping because of that reason. Your plan is to not even try to escape but to complain about your imprisonment to other people who you also believe to be imprisoned. The others point you to the open door but you then complain about how unfair it is that you should even have to escape since you didn't ask to be captured. Day after day, you complain about being captured but don't do anything to free yourself. After a while, no one takes you seriously. It's become clear to everyone that you don't really want to be free.
So would a renounciation of citizenship be an escape...or at least an attempt?
If that is true, how about being a bit less harsh with your criticism? I've been accused a few times, either directly or otherwise, of being a thief and a murderer because I vote. That's a bit...alienating. My problem is not that I am an immoral person, it's that I'm trying to sort this all out. I understand the importance of property rights, and I agree there is a problem with taking from people who don't want to give. The thing is, I think lives are more important than property, and I think there is also a problem with allowing people to go hungry or die because they lack resources, and in a purely free-market system, that would surely happen, would it not? I'm conflicted, not because I don't think for myself, but because I do.
I can recommend some literature if you like. Bastiat does a solid job of explaining the importance of property.
Property is an extension of your mind and body. It is your life realized.
"Life, faculties, production-in other words, individuality, liberty, property-this is man." - Bastiat
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.
) when it comes to some kind of currency being a sustainable model of exchange. 
), who used to talk about a voluntary exchange of goods and services based on some sort of "time currency". Meaning you get certain time considerations in exchange for your labor/product because time is basically the most valuable resource, by default, for all of us since nobody lives forever. 
)
