[tame_deuces]

Some stuff from the linked website in quotes:

[ QUOTE ]
A government order cannot mend a broken leg, but it can command the mutilation of a sound body. It cannot bestow intelligence, but it can forbid the use of intelligence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't even know what this means. A government order can't break a leg, but it can give the command to mend a broken leg is just as true.

And you certainly can bestow most accepted definitions of intelligence on someone, it is a training thing.

[ QUOTE ]
It is impossible to "wage a war for peace" or "fight politics by becoming political."

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone sure loves their play on words, both historically and logically speaking this statement is highly debatable.

[ QUOTE ]
Neither can a person be compelled to do anything against his or her will, for each person is ultimately responsible for his or her own actions

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement is extremely debatable using what we currently know in psychology, and shows a very simplified view of how humans make decisions. How is AC going to deal with the fact that humans tend to follow - regardless of their own moral stance of their actions (A principle which has shown consistency across all known cultures, genders and personality types)?

[ QUOTE ]
A government might destroy one's body or property, but it cannot injure one's philosophy of life.

[/ QUOTE ]

The logic value of the statement also remains exactly the same if you exchange government with 'My neighbour', and again, I don't know what this means, I'm quite certain that the government can influences philosophy of life.

I'm actually fairly certain that some people become voluntaryists because of their governments.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, and more important from the voluntaryist point of view, is what it does to the person wielding the power: it corrupts that person's character.

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting view and utterly confusing. What is the definition of corruption here?