"The Andy Fox Dilemma"

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
terrible at convincing other people

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
PVN, you're the single best example of this. Both parts, I mean, including the "good at arguing" side that was deleted from the quote above.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, it may actually be true that anti-statists are "terrible" at convincing other people, but in the aggregate, they're orders of magnitude better than any other pidgeonhole group.

[pvn]

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

Seems to me like the ACists are the ones with blinders on, as they are unable to process any sort of argument that does not accept their ownership and non-aggression axioms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you trying to say that ACists don't understand the arguments put forth by statists, or just that you think they are never right? Am I supposed to just take your word on this or something? Your reason for them having blinders seems to just be "they don't agree with me."

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a lot of ACists don't seem to understand how people can reject the axioms they have adopted. They automatically think that anyone who does not agree with these axioms has beliefs that are incoherent.

[/ QUOTE ]

So far, all belief systems that have different axioms HAVE been incoherent, or more accurately, inconsistent, which is even worse.

Are you saying you have a consistent moral system? Please lay out the axioms.

[/ QUOTE ]
DCism isn't consistent (in that it ultimately leads to slavery, which it supposedly opposes), as I've shown elsewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you moorobot? You haven't shown it, you've argued it. Poorly (your own "demonstration" included premises you yourself characterized as "non-demonstrable"). Further, even if you had "shown" this, it would not show an inconsistency in the sense that the word is being used here. Desirable =/= consistent (though many find consistency to be a desirable quality).