Why Im no longer an ACist

[Poofler]

Weird to read this since I basically consider myself an extreme minarchist now, but not quite AC.

Too bad Borodog's distraught right now, that could be fun.

[DontRaiseMeBro]

do u guys think that the move from minarchist to anarchist is an incremental change or a monumental leap in thinking?

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]

valenzeula: ACists believe don't believe in freedom
ACists: Yes they do, they do not support coersion on someone.
valenzeula: Well, by true freedom, I mean the freedom to not be hungry and live forever.

He is twisting the definition of freedom beyond what is accepted and implied.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't recall him saying "ACists don't believe in freedom". I think he was just disagreeing the AC concept of freedom. I thought his idea of "coercision by non-moral agents" was interesting and makes a good point. I don't doubt that ACists "believe in freedom" FWIW. I still don't see any fallacy.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
do u guys think that the move from minarchist to anarchist is an incremental change or a monumental leap in thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither. I'm a Libertarian in practice (minarchist, but I don't really like that word) and an ACist in spirit. I think you can be both, and moving from one view-point to the other isn't particularly tough.

Cody

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

valenzeula: ACists believe don't believe in freedom
ACists: Yes they do, they do not support coersion on someone.
valenzeula: Well, by true freedom, I mean the freedom to not be hungry and live forever.

He is twisting the definition of freedom beyond what is accepted and implied.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't recall him saying "ACists don't believe in freedom". I think he was just disagreeing the AC concept of freedom. I thought his idea of "coercision by non-moral agents" was interesting and makes a good point. I don't doubt that ACists "believe in freedom" FWIW. I still don't see any fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course he never directly stated it, but I had to simplify things since you didn't understand the fallacy.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
do u guys think that the move from minarchist to anarchist is an incremental change or a monumental leap in thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it depends if you're a moralist, utilitarian, or both. I'm mostly a utilitarian, and just need to be convinced government < free market for quality of life purposes. I think moralists have a bigger leap from coercion to no coercion.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
do u guys think that the move from minarchist to anarchist is an incremental change or a monumental leap in thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

I considered myself a minarchist for a while before I decided I was an "ACist." I still don't like to label myself as anything, cause all I am is some [censored] on the internet that posts here between poker hands and hasn't thought about this stuff anywhere near as much as many libertarian thinkers. So to call myself necessarily the same thing as someone else is sort of weird. I'm just fortunate that I have a couple really smart friends, and that I found this board with some really intelligent posters on it.

I'd say it was gradual in the sense that it took longer than it should have. Minarchism provides a sort of outlet to be what makes sense to you, but also feel like you don't have to totally reject the terms by which other people think about things. But eventually it just sort of hit me over a 2-3 day period that "AC" was my conclusion, and that I was just mindfucking myself to insist otherwise.

In most cases the difference is probably semantics. However, I would say there are probably a fair number of "minarchists" who do have a drastically different line of reasoning and don't necessarily accept the principles of why freedom works, but just so happen to come to the conclusion that limited government is their preference, for whatever reasons.

[Luxoris]

"Axiom: individuals own their bodies"

Oops. Back to square 1.

[valenzuela]

Vhawk: Ure actually proposing democracy, right now George Bush is the chooser of America, Sarkozy the chooser of France, etc.

AlexM: I don’t have enough information to discuss the effects of American government policy on poverty, but I will tell you that most good governments tend to decrease poverty if the programs are done correctly.

TomCollins: I like how you automatically assume that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is either stupid or “misguided” perhaps you are the one who is misguided! .
You are only putting emphasis on negative freedom while ignoring positive freedom, that point of view may look fine to wave your e-penis on internet message board discussions but if you apply them in the real world it doesn’t work quite as well, you simply choose to ignore all the bad effects of a total free-market , this is noted by the fact that you laugh at the idea of “not starving” as a definition of freedom. I think that not starving is a more reasonable definition of freedom than the right to not be coerced on your dubious absolute property-rights.

Kaj: Good posts

Pvn: 1) Success in life is down to brute luck, those lottery winners may have gotten “lucky” because they won a lottery prize but they were unlucky in the sense that they never got a proper education, success in life depends a lot on self determination but it can also come down to one broken condom, meeting the right person at the right time, your father becoming an alcoholic when you are 6, etc.
2) I’m not making an appeal to emotion; I’m making an argument based on utilitarian grounds.

Owsley: I agree with what you say.

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

valenzeula: ACists believe don't believe in freedom
ACists: Yes they do, they do not support coersion on someone.
valenzeula: Well, by true freedom, I mean the freedom to not be hungry and live forever.

He is twisting the definition of freedom beyond what is accepted and implied.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't recall him saying "ACists don't believe in freedom". I think he was just disagreeing the AC concept of freedom. I thought his idea of "coercision by non-moral agents" was interesting and makes a good point. I don't doubt that ACists "believe in freedom" FWIW. I still don't see any fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course he never directly stated it, but I had to simplify things since you didn't understand the fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your "simplification" amounts to a false characterization. Imo.