Reactions to AC

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It just occurred to me: I think the reaction to AC is pretty similar to a typical reaction of (open-minded) atheists to Christianity when they "first" hear of it in detail.

Specifically, they start out hopeful, because AC promises a lot, but end up dubious because it has failings that appear intuitively obvious, and when it can't directly address 'em, it tends to resort to faith.

Not that this necessarily implies AC is "false" - it just makes it difficult for habitually sceptical folks to accept it as true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interestingly, you have it completly backwards. AC, like atheism, is a default position. AC promises nothing. AC does nothing. Statism in its various forms are the empty promises, the faith-based belief. Trust us, give us the power, we won't use it against you.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, being an atheist but not an ACist (yet?) I'd have to say pvn is correct here. It seems like all the 'problems' that aren't being adequately addressed are just...hard, complicated situations. There is a reason they are raised and its because there aren't simple, univerally accepted solutions to them...or they wouldn't be problems. But if your goal is to debunk something or maintain the status quo, all you really need is the semblance of failure.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
It just occurred to me: I think the reaction to AC is pretty similar to a typical reaction of (open-minded) atheists to Christianity when they "first" hear of it in detail.

[/ QUOTE ]

More like the reaction of Christians first hearing of atheism.

[ QUOTE ]
Specifically, they start out hopeful, because AC promises a lot,

[/ QUOTE ]

AC doesn't promise anything. Government does.

[ QUOTE ]
but end up dubious because it has failings that appear intuitively obvious, and when it can't directly address 'em, it tends to resort to faith.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somewhat true, but this is still even more true for anything involving government.

[ QUOTE ]
Not that this necessarily implies AC is "false" - it just makes it difficult for habitually sceptical folks to accept it as true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, and I don't fully accept it myself, however the moral basis of AC is unquestionable and as a habitual skeptic, government has done a lot more to earn my skepticism.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know man, I hear AC's talk about how AC will improve upon the totalitarianism of the state. Thus, it *does* make promises: that it will replace the state with something better, and not itself subsequently fail and be replaced by something worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where? What is the state replaced by? Nothing. Where are promises that it will not fail? Well, it can't "fail" since there is nothing. Nothing cannot fail, it's nothing. But yes, it's *possible* for "something worse" to arise. I've never denied that. In fact, I've specifically mentioned it *many* times. I'm not preaching utopia here.

[ QUOTE ]
and (my favorite) that AC is "more moral" than a state.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can voluntary associations NOT be "more moral" than a state?

[ QUOTE ]
So AC, or at least its proponents, do seem to make promises.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no guarantees. But we can certainly figure out that somethings are more likely than others.

[bkholdem]

I will share my initial reactions to AC. I came here as a libertarian, albeit not interested in politics and not active in any way (not discussions, reading, etc) for several years.

I was both intrigued and SCARED. I was intrigued by the fact that the concept was something I had never heard of or considered, and also intrigued because the prominent posters seemed to be really smart and putting forth sound, logical arguments. I was impressed by that.

I was not initially 'scared', just curious. But as I started to contemplate what an AC world might be like, in reality with me living in it, those initial thoughts SCARED ME. I was scared of the unknown and uncertainty of it all. How would fire departments/services, police departments/services, roads, bridges, etc be provided for? Several 'what if' scenarios came to mind. What if we are invaded? That was the big one for me. What if Russia or N. Korea, or whoever invades or starts shooting missles and bombs at us? What the hell are we going to do then? Will we not all be screwed?

But I have come to value reason and rational judgement over emotion. I recognized my fear for what it was, an emotion. I do not use emotions to win at poker or to plan my day or plan my future, at least I do not do those things when functioning optimally. I use reason and judgement. I use my brain. My thoughts. So I tried my best to keep an open mind because I had already clearly seen that the people preaching AC were smart. They did not suddenly turn into morons because I am experiencing fear. So I continued to read and learn. When I had a few questions I asked them.

And ultimately what I realized was that if somehow we were invaded the invaders would not be coming for a conquest of my measly possessions, they would be after the rich people's stuff. So the rich people would logically be taking steps to defend their stuff while I would be pretty much ignored. Hell, if it came to it and someone came to my door with a gun intending to kick me out of my place and have me live on the streets because they were taking over I would shoot it out with them, but this would be a very unlikely scenario. Any invaders would be after the rich people's stuff. And we could be invaded anyway and I could still possibly be faced with some guys coming to my door intent on taking over my place and kicking me to the street whereby I would still need to shoot it out with them. But because I realized that invaders would basically be after rich people's stuff I was not afraid of not having national defense any longer.

So without my fear, and with my reason and judgement, I decided that AC was a pretty good idea.

[Claunchy]

Just started reading all this stuff about AC about a week ago, and I have a couple questions.

Okay, I understand how we could have private arbiters and private law-enforcement agencies. But who determines what laws they enforce? I mean, the simple stuff like murder is easy enough, but what about complicated stuff like statutory rape (i.e., what age of consent), or easements (like if someone's property is landlocked)?

And what would give a private agency the right to arrest and imprison people?

Edit: Just thought of one more. What would prevent corporations from completely ruining the environment (not that gov't is doing a very good job of preventing this now anyway, but the point is still there)?

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
People get personally offended when you challenge ideals that they've believed their entire life. America = freedom, duh. When someone points out that this is not the case, it's much easier to strike out at the messenger than to actually internalize the truth, admit that you've been bamboozled, and that what you believed in actually stands for very nearly the complete opposite of everything it's sold as.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you agree though that America is relatively more "free" than many/most places out there? Most people judge world politics relative to what actually exists; not relative to some abstract ideal. We haven't ban "bamboozled" so much as we just don't analyze our world the same way you do.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
I will share my initial reactions to AC. I came here as a libertarian, albeit not interested in politics and not active in any way (not discussions, reading, etc) for several years.

I was both intrigued and SCARED. I was intrigued by the fact that the concept was something I had never heard of or considered, and also intrigued because the prominent posters seemed to be really smart and putting forth sound, logical arguments. I was impressed by that.

I was not initially 'scared', just curious. But as I started to contemplate what an AC world might be like, in reality with me living in it, those initial thoughts SCARED ME. I was scared of the unknown and uncertainty of it all. How would fire departments/services, police departments/services, roads, bridges, etc be provided for? Several 'what if' scenarios came to mind. What if we are invaded? That was the big one for me. What if Russia or N. Korea, or whoever invades or starts shooting missles and bombs at us? What the hell are we going to do then? Will we not all be screwed?

But I have come to value reason and rational judgement over emotion. I recognized my fear for what it was, an emotion. I do not use emotions to win at poker or to plan my day or plan my future, at least I do not do those things when functioning optimally. I use reason and judgement. I use my brain. My thoughts. So I tried my best to keep an open mind because I had already clearly seen that the people preaching AC were smart. They did not suddenly turn into morons because I am experiencing fear. So I continued to read and learn. When I had a few questions I asked them.

And ultimately what I realized was that if somehow we were invaded the invaders would not be coming for a conquest of my measly possessions, they would be after the rich people's stuff. So the rich people would logically be taking steps to defend their stuff while I would be pretty much ignored. Hell, if it came to it and someone came to my door with a gun intending to kick me out of my place and have me live on the streets because they were taking over I would shoot it out with them, but this would be a very unlikely scenario. Any invaders would be after the rich people's stuff. And we could be invaded anyway and I could still possibly be faced with some guys coming to my door intent on taking over my place and kicking me to the street whereby I would still need to shoot it out with them. But because I realized that invaders would basically be after rich people's stuff I was not afraid of not having national defense any longer.

So without my fear, and with my reason and judgement, I decided that AC was a pretty good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fallacy in your post is that you assume invaders are always just after stuff. See Nazi Germany, et al.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know man, I hear AC's talk about how AC will improve upon the totalitarianism of the state. Thus, it *does* make promises: that it will replace the state with something better, and not itself subsequently fail and be replaced by something worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where? What is the state replaced by? Nothing. Where are promises that it will not fail? Well, it can't "fail" since there is nothing. Nothing cannot fail, it's nothing. But yes, it's *possible* for "something worse" to arise. I've never denied that. In fact, I've specifically mentioned it *many* times. I'm not preaching utopia here.

[/ QUOTE ]
You assert that AC makes no promises. Does it follow then, that when I ask you, "In what ways is AC better than government?", your response will be, "It isn't." Or will you instead recite a litany of areas in which AC is assuredly superior?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and (my favorite) that AC is "more moral" than a state.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can voluntary associations NOT be "more moral" than a state?

[/ QUOTE ]
AC cannot promise me exclusively voluntary associations, unless your claim above (your claim: that AC makes no promises) is false.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So AC, or at least its proponents, do seem to make promises.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no guarantees. But we can certainly figure out that somethings are more likely than others.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. I've read some of the outcomes you folks think are likely, and I think you're wildly optimistic in a number of cases.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
The fallacy in your post is that you assume invaders are always just after stuff. See Nazi Germany, et al.

[/ QUOTE ]
So Nazi Germany wasn't seeking lebensraum?

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will share my initial reactions to AC. I came here as a libertarian, albeit not interested in politics and not active in any way (not discussions, reading, etc) for several years.

I was both intrigued and SCARED. I was intrigued by the fact that the concept was something I had never heard of or considered, and also intrigued because the prominent posters seemed to be really smart and putting forth sound, logical arguments. I was impressed by that.

I was not initially 'scared', just curious. But as I started to contemplate what an AC world might be like, in reality with me living in it, those initial thoughts SCARED ME. I was scared of the unknown and uncertainty of it all. How would fire departments/services, police departments/services, roads, bridges, etc be provided for? Several 'what if' scenarios came to mind. What if we are invaded? That was the big one for me. What if Russia or N. Korea, or whoever invades or starts shooting missles and bombs at us? What the hell are we going to do then? Will we not all be screwed?

But I have come to value reason and rational judgement over emotion. I recognized my fear for what it was, an emotion. I do not use emotions to win at poker or to plan my day or plan my future, at least I do not do those things when functioning optimally. I use reason and judgement. I use my brain. My thoughts. So I tried my best to keep an open mind because I had already clearly seen that the people preaching AC were smart. They did not suddenly turn into morons because I am experiencing fear. So I continued to read and learn. When I had a few questions I asked them.

And ultimately what I realized was that if somehow we were invaded the invaders would not be coming for a conquest of my measly possessions, they would be after the rich people's stuff. So the rich people would logically be taking steps to defend their stuff while I would be pretty much ignored. Hell, if it came to it and someone came to my door with a gun intending to kick me out of my place and have me live on the streets because they were taking over I would shoot it out with them, but this would be a very unlikely scenario. Any invaders would be after the rich people's stuff. And we could be invaded anyway and I could still possibly be faced with some guys coming to my door intent on taking over my place and kicking me to the street whereby I would still need to shoot it out with them. But because I realized that invaders would basically be after rich people's stuff I was not afraid of not having national defense any longer.

So without my fear, and with my reason and judgement, I decided that AC was a pretty good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fallacy in your post is that you assume invaders are always just after stuff. See Nazi Germany, et al.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you put it that way I guess I should start suking the govt dik again.

After all, another country would probably come over here to invade this land and want to randomly murder millions of people but leave the rich people's stuff alone. Like they would just murder all the poor people and middle class people and then occupy their property while leaving alone all the rich people's booty. And then they would just blend in and live here and live in harmony with the rich people without bothering them. hehe