The wondrous, non-coercive philosophy of anarcho-capitalism

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
Which part did you like better? The part where he talked about identifying people who "are going to become" criminals? Or the part about forcing a wife to choose between divorcing their husbands and relocating if the husband drops out of the (voluntary, heh) DRO system, or losing her own coverage and consequently being unable to buy groceries.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I am concerned as an ACist Stefan M. is a megalomaniac. He is a cotrol freak who secretly lusts for power. He also fronts like he is an expert on a whole range of topics. Like most megalo's he is very charming and charismatic. He also has a few people on that site who are devoted to him to a degree that is beyond reasonable. Some aspects of him and his site and a few of his followers actually cult-like behavior.

He does not speak for me in any way, shape, or form.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, you are perfectly free to not have a DRO if you're willing to live on your own land, grow your own food etc. You could also start your own DRO.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a statist wrote this, Boro and PVN would come rolling in with their "GTFO" argument. But regardless...

Here's a fact: You are free to do those things today! Make any of the 200+ nations on this earth an offer for them to cede you some territory. It's really no different than offering to buy your own territory from Company X, Y, or Z in ACland. I'm not guranateeing any of them will sell to you, but then again, you can't guarantee that any of the land owners in ACland will either.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which part did you like better? The part where he talked about identifying people who "are going to become" criminals? Or the part about forcing a wife to choose between divorcing their husbands and relocating if the husband drops out of the (voluntary, heh) DRO system, or losing her own coverage and consequently being unable to buy groceries.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I am concerned as an ACist Stefan M. is a megalomaniac. He is a cotrol freak who secretly lusts for power. He also fronts like he is an expert on a whole range of topics. Like most megalo's he is very charming and charismatic. He also has a few people on that site who are devoted to him to a degree that is beyond reasonable. Some aspects of him and his site and a few of his followers actually cult-like behavior.

He does not speak for me in any way, shape, or form.

[/ QUOTE ]

OH NOES, I FOUND AN ACIST WHO SAYS SOME STUFF THAT SOUNDS SORT OF UNCOMFORTABLE!!! ERGO AC IS A SYSTEM THAT IS ALL ABOUT MAKING PEOPLE DO BAD THINGS!!!! QED!!!1!

Hey guys, I found a state that is "bad". Therefore, we can conclude that statism is always going to be exactly like this!!!

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, you are perfectly free to not have a DRO if you're willing to live on your own land, grow your own food etc. You could also start your own DRO.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a statist wrote this, Boro and PVN would come rolling in with their "GTFO" argument. But regardless...

Here's a fact: You are free to do those things today! Make any of the 200+ nations on this earth an offer for them to cede you some territory. It's really no different than offering to buy your own territory from Company X, Y, or Z in ACland. I'm not guranateeing any of them will sell to you, but then again, you can't guarantee that any of the land owners in ACland will either.

[/ QUOTE ]


The difference is between territory and property. When people own property they have all the right to not let others on it if they want.

Dispurate organizations don't hold territory just like insurance agencies don't hold territories.

Let's say I have a piece of land, and I know that you don't have a contract with a dispute organization, then I am not going to allow you on my property because the risks are very high if an incident occurs.

This is all in line with voluntary solutions to problems, and very focussed on prevention.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which part did you like better? The part where he talked about identifying people who "are going to become" criminals? Or the part about forcing a wife to choose between divorcing their husbands and relocating if the husband drops out of the (voluntary, heh) DRO system, or losing her own coverage and consequently being unable to buy groceries.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I am concerned as an ACist Stefan M. is a megalomaniac. He is a cotrol freak who secretly lusts for power. He also fronts like he is an expert on a whole range of topics. Like most megalo's he is very charming and charismatic. He also has a few people on that site who are devoted to him to a degree that is beyond reasonable. Some aspects of him and his site and a few of his followers actually cult-like behavior.

He does not speak for me in any way, shape, or form.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me either. If AC ever comes to pass, I hope it's a far cry from what he envisions.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, you are perfectly free to not have a DRO if you're willing to live on your own land, grow your own food etc. You could also start your own DRO.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a statist wrote this, Boro and PVN would come rolling in with their "GTFO" argument. But regardless...

Here's a fact: You are free to do those things today! Make any of the 200+ nations on this earth an offer for them to cede you some territory. It's really no different than offering to buy your own territory from Company X, Y, or Z in ACland. I'm not guranateeing any of them will sell to you, but then again, you can't guarantee that any of the land owners in ACland will either.

[/ QUOTE ]


The difference is between territory and property. When people own property they have all the right to not let others on it if they want.

Dispurate organizations don't hold territory just like insurance agencies don't hold territories.

Let's say I have a piece of land, and I know that you don't have a contract with a dispute organization, then I am not going to allow you on my property because the risks are very high if an incident occurs.

This is all in line with voluntary solutions to problems, and very focussed on prevention.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not talking about the dispute companies owning land, I'm talking about all the land-owning companies in ACland that you all want to pretend won't exist, and which will have carte blaqnche sovereignty over their territory and operate very much like a "state".

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not talking about the dispute companies owning land, I'm talking about all the land-owning companies in ACland that you all want to pretend won't exist, and which will have carte blaqnche sovereignty over their territory and operate very much like a "state".

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the problem here?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is the best you have? That in a free market someone might refuse to do business with you? How coercive!

You crack me up dude.

[/ QUOTE ]
One of the following is true:

1. You did not listen to the podcast.
2. You did listen to the podcast, but are so far gone that you failed to recognize just how bad it is.
3. You're did listen to the podcast, and did recognize the horror it entails, but are going to pursue your agenda anyway, and have decided to feign innocence/ignorance as a means of damage control.

Certainly if you listened to the podcast, you know this: "In a free market someone might refuse to do business with you?" in no way represents Molyneux's vision.

Sincerely, of the possibilities, I hope you simply didn't listen (and if this is the case, I hope that now you will).

Good luck,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

Numer 1 is the case. I don't particularly care for Molyneux. Luckily, no one appointed him the Architect of the free market, so his ideas are just that, ideas. By the way, I'm still waiting for you to actually demonstrate that his ideas were coercive. Whatever else the guy is, he's a pacifist.

If he did happen to come up with an idea that was based on institutionalized coercion, given the culture that would have to be in place for free market anarchy to exist, such an idea would be selected against by the market.

Your argument here is essentially the same as one of us using the writings of Hitler to disprove the wondrous philosophy of statism. Molyneux is just one guy, and many of us don't even care for him.

[jogger08152]

<font color="red"> "hmm, this podcast really does sound pretty awful... i better do some damage control, hopefully convince people not to listen. but how...? ah, i know! i'll try to discredit it. guess i should go for sarcasm - better turn on caps-lock too, to make it sound exaggerated. okay, here goes..."

"guess i'll open with some l337, that sounds ridiculous, maybe it'll cue the laughter"</font>

[ QUOTE ]
OH NOES,

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red"> "good start, good start. now what? ah yes, i better make it sound like molyneux is out of the mainstream of ac's... but sh*t! how can i do that? he hosts freedomainradio for chrissakes! hmm... ah-hah! i know! i'll just minimize! i'll refer to him as 'an acist', with no emphasis at all, that should make him seem unimportant!"</font>

[ QUOTE ]
I FOUND AN ACIST

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">"now, what about the awful, dystopian picture of ac he was spouting on that podcast? god damn him for making us look so bad... maybe i can minimize again here? it'll be stupidly transparent, but that thing was so bad i guess i better give it a shot, hope this works!"</font>

[ QUOTE ]
WHO SAYS SOME STUFF THAT SOUNDS SORT OF UNCOMFORTABLE!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">"lol, i hope they fall for that. i should probably tie it together somehow... ah sure, i'll make a completely spurious argument that has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP. as long as my readers are stupid as hell, that should work!"</font>

[ QUOTE ]
ERGO AC IS A SYSTEM THAT IS ALL ABOUT MAKING PEOPLE DO BAD THINGS

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">"now a little more l337, keep 'em distracted, keep 'em distracted"</font>

[ QUOTE ]
!!!! QED!!!1!

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">"cool. now, for the coup de grace, i'll close with a specious formal analogy, and I've got just the one in mind:

dictatorship:democracy :: ac:ac

Yep, that's it:

'dictatorship is to democracy as AC is to AC'

jesus, now how the hell am i gonna sell that?

hmm, well, as long as readers don't employ their analytical abilities whatsoever, i've at least got a chance to fool 'em! still, since my false analogy is so completely transparent, i better heap some more sh*t on my pile. what to do, what to do... ah! i know! i'll use another specious argument - if i keep 'em coming fast and furious, maybe people really won't actually think about what i'm saying."</font>

[ QUOTE ]
Hey guys, I found a state that is "bad". Therefore, we can conclude that statism is always going to be exactly like this!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">"finally i'll throw in a picture of a dictator, pictures are distracting - and heck, the guy behind him has on shiny buttons, which is even more distracting! this should really make a hash of things"</font>



[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="blue"> Hey PVN:

Yeah, you fooled us.

Nice hand.

Best regards,
Jogger</font>

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is the best you have? That in a free market someone might refuse to do business with you? How coercive!

You crack me up dude.

[/ QUOTE ]
One of the following is true:

1. You did not listen to the podcast.
2. You did listen to the podcast, but are so far gone that you failed to recognize just how bad it is.
3. You're did listen to the podcast, and did recognize the horror it entails, but are going to pursue your agenda anyway, and have decided to feign innocence/ignorance as a means of damage control.

Certainly if you listened to the podcast, you know this: "In a free market someone might refuse to do business with you?" in no way represents Molyneux's vision.

Sincerely, of the possibilities, I hope you simply didn't listen (and if this is the case, I hope that now you will).

Good luck,
Jogger

[/ QUOTE ]

Numer 1 is the case. I don't particularly care for Molyneux. Luckily, no one appointed him the Architect of the free market, so his ideas are just that, ideas. By the way, I'm still waiting for you to actually demonstrate that his ideas were coercive. Whatever else the guy is, he's a pacifist.

If he did happen to come up with an idea that was based on institutionalized coercion, given the culture that would have to be in place for free market anarchy to exist, such an idea would be selected against by the market.

Your argument here is essentially the same as one of us using the writings of Hitler to disprove the wondrous philosophy of statism. Molyneux is just one guy, and many of us don't even care for him.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please listen to the podcast, then tell me how his vision differs from yours. If you think a different outcome is probable, I'd like to discuss your vision.

FYI, you could have skipped the "How coercive!" sarcasm and just said the above in the first place. Contrary to what you may think, and despite the fact that I don't (yet!) see a way AC can work, I'm certainly willing to listen, compare and politely debate its - and government's - merits and demerits.

Edit: this is true even with PVN, if his ability to converse civilly is not completely beyond help.

Best regards,
Jogger