AC and power

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So you're saying that until somene convinces you that peace is good, you're going to default to violence?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd. What I said was that I am unconvinced that the rule of force would be less prevalent in an AC society than it is in many nation-states today. Basically the exact opposite of what you are attributing to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said you have to be convinced of the viability of non-violence. I don't know what other conclusion to draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, I said I am not convinced that force would be less prevalent in an AC society. I am not convinced that, if you got rid of the government, non-violence would be the norm.

[/ QUOTE ]

What, exactly is the difference between "not convinced that force would be less prevalent" and "unconvinced of the viability of non-violence"? Who's being obtuse here?

(note that "you're being obtuse" is the new way of saying "you're a troll" to anyone that disagrees with you.)

And you don't get to AC by simply "getting rid of the government". If the established order is suddenly changed to such an extreme, of course chaos will be widespread. This is true of *any* two conditions that you pick for the "Before" and "After" - and the more dissimilar they are, and the quicker and more unexpected the transition is, the more chaos will be observed.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

Or maybe I think the circumstances that would lead to a stateless America would be less desirable than other outcomes.

I said a stateless society could POTENTIALLY exist under those circumstances. However, there is no reason that a government could not also be founded on those principles.

This is pretty much SOP for you; any time someone disagrees with you, accuse them of supporting violence against innocents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets test your assertion:

PVN which color is better blue or yellow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Blue FTW.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Yellow is clearly MUCH better!

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

Or maybe I think the circumstances that would lead to a stateless America would be less desirable than other outcomes.

I said a stateless society could POTENTIALLY exist under those circumstances. However, there is no reason that a government could not also be founded on those principles.

This is pretty much SOP for you; any time someone disagrees with you, accuse them of supporting violence against innocents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets test your assertion:

PVN which color is better blue or yellow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Blue FTW.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Yellow is clearly MUCH better!

[/ QUOTE ]

NAZI! You probably shoot puppies for fun!

[NT!]

[ QUOTE ]
What, exactly is the difference between "not convinced that force would be less prevalent" and "unconvinced of the viability of non-violence"? Who's being obtuse here?

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is, I am not saying that non-violence is impossible. I am saying that I am not convinced an AC society would function as non-violently as you envision it. Specifically, I am unconvinced that regional security firms would provide a level of stability and personal protection from infringement and harm that would be on par with that enjoyed by the average citizen in the developed world today. (And that is not necessarily an endorsement of security practices in the developed world, merely a barometer against which to measure my estimation, since we are speculating here.) Nor am I convinced that the organizing principles of AC (competition, markets and the sanctity of property) would arise from, or contribute to, a meaningful and strong social fabric built on mutual esteem and capable of empowering society rather than leaving it victim to the whims of force.

I'm going to class now so I may not have much to say after this.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can tell, bk, I just had a lengthy last word on the topic that you've yet to address. I'm interested in hearing how a theory of the state necessarily includes the initiation of illegitimate force. I'm also interested in hearing you rebut my objections to market anarchism.



[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for getting back to me in uncapped type NT!

Did you get assigned expanded duties to be the punctuation and spelling moderator of the politics forum recently? If so, congradulations!

Anyway, when I made that comment I was thinking about the Twana Brawley thread... I mean the Al Sharpton thread.... I mean the Don Imus thread and how IMO you got egg on your proverbial face due ot the extremely outrageous behavior of Sharpton in the Twana Brawley affairs.

I would like to officially retract my implying that I am superior to you in anything and officially acknowedge your superior spelling credentials. I would also like to thank you for correcting my spelling in the manner you did, because as a result I now know how to spell ridiculous. I would also consider it a personal favor if you could monitor all of my future posts and correct any spelling errors I make in the same manner as It will help me learn.

I am a terrible speller and don't try to make a secret of it. When someone asks me how to spell a word at work my typical response is "I have no idea, I think I spell at the 10th grade level" or something like that. I actually found it amusing that you took the time to correct my spelling like you did and as I reflected on it a few times during the day realized you did me a favor. Thanks again!

Now as to the specifics in this post, I don't know if I could respond to the latter parts in a useful manner at all but before I even attempt to respond to the first part I need to clearly understand what you are talking about.

When you say: I'm interested in hearing how a theory of the state necessarily includes the initiation of illegitimate force. -end quote

I don't really see the practical benefits of talking about a 'theory of state'. I'm a pragmatist. I live and breath in the real world, not the theoretical one. Our state is very, very broken and way way out of control. It has been for a long time and it continues to spiral more out of control all the time. If you find it entertaining or satisfying in some way to think about and discuss various theories of how to make some ideal state work enjoy it. I don't enjoy that, nor do I enjoy arguing against theoretical ideals and don't intend to dialouge on that at any length whatsoever.

But in any event I need to understand what you mean specifically by 'illegitimate force'. I hope you realize this is a highly subjective concept so I need to know exactly what you are talking about. Please explain it to me, within the concept of your state, like I'm a 6 year old.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What, exactly is the difference between "not convinced that force would be less prevalent" and "unconvinced of the viability of non-violence"? Who's being obtuse here?

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is, I am not saying that non-violence is impossible. I am saying that I am not convinced an AC society would function as non-violently as you envision it. Specifically, I am unconvinced that regional security firms would provide a level of stability and personal protection from infringement and harm that would be on par with that enjoyed by the average citizen in the developed world today. (And that is not necessarily an endorsement of security practices in the developed world, merely a barometer against which to measure my estimation, since we are speculating here.) Nor am I convinced that the organizing principles of AC (competition, markets and the sanctity of property) would arise from, or contribute to, a meaningful and strong social fabric built on mutual esteem and capable of empowering society rather than leaving it victim to the whims of force.



[/ QUOTE ]

Your not convinced, YET. But you are less skeptical than you were 6 months ago, and more skeptical of government than you were 6 months ago, aren't you?

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

Or maybe I think the circumstances that would lead to a stateless America would be less desirable than other outcomes.

I said a stateless society could POTENTIALLY exist under those circumstances. However, there is no reason that a government could not also be founded on those principles.

This is pretty much SOP for you; any time someone disagrees with you, accuse them of supporting violence against innocents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets test your assertion:

PVN which color is better blue or yellow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Blue FTW.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Yellow is clearly MUCH better!

[/ QUOTE ]

NAZI! You probably shoot puppies for fun!

[/ QUOTE ]

There is only one way to settle this in a civilized fashion: democracy.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

Or maybe I think the circumstances that would lead to a stateless America would be less desirable than other outcomes.

I said a stateless society could POTENTIALLY exist under those circumstances. However, there is no reason that a government could not also be founded on those principles.

This is pretty much SOP for you; any time someone disagrees with you, accuse them of supporting violence against innocents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets test your assertion:

PVN which color is better blue or yellow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Blue FTW.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Yellow is clearly MUCH better!

[/ QUOTE ]

NAZI! You probably shoot puppies for fun!

[/ QUOTE ]

There is only one way to settle this in a civilized fashion: democracy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Citizens of 2p2, do not be cajoled into accepting PVN's assertions that blue is better. There is research currently underway looking into the dangers of the color blue to school children. Help me save the children brothers and sisters! PM me for details on how to contribute to the offical 'brighten our days, yellow cars, better lives' campaign fund.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]

If people are too poor to afford security, how much do you actually think you can make by robbing them? Do you think you're going to make it to the forbes 400 this way?

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep making this retarded objection and I will keep pointing to the fact that it's obviously very easy to take money from people with no protection, and that not everyone needs to or wants to be on the forbes 400. You seem to think everyone wants millions of dollars. I'm talking about people just making a decent living by working on mobs that terrorize people too poor to protect themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
The limits of your imagination are not a convincing argument. If nobody cares about these people, why doesn't this happen now?


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. This combined with your "why is this not widespread" point is just seriously LOL. Are you somehow unaware of crime in the world. Do you comprehend that there are, in fact, violent neighborhoods all around the world and that historically whenever a lot of poor people have been concentrated in one area there is very frequently violence?

But yes, please you and bkh keep talking about "catastrophe" and "death star objection". It's quite telling that your only defense against my objections is to say that people stealing and murdering and the existence of mobs and violent gangs is somehow a figment of my state-propagandized imagination.

KEEP IN MIND that I have frequently stated that I believe a smaller government is better. What I'm saying is that a very strong communal spirit is necessary to accomplish the things you claim can occur in AC. Your arguments are that people will simply not do this because it's not worth it, but it's just ridiculous.

[NT!]

[ QUOTE ]
Your not convinced, YET. But you are less skeptical than you were 6 months ago, and more skeptical of government than you were 6 months ago, aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be hard for me to be any more skeptical of the government than I was six months ago, or two years ago, or five for that matter. As I said, I think some of the objections market anarchism poses to the state as it exists in practice are quite relevant. I'm just not convinced that their solutions are any better; in fact, my intuition tells me they are worse.

I'll try to respond to your other post in a little while, my professor is about to demonstrate a 'mental status exam' on me to the class.