Anarcho Capitalism take 1million

[wtfsvi]

ACism is like a religion, where private property rights are what you worship.

"Private property is right and good. Limitations on private property are evil and horrible. Why? Because we say so and it feels right. This is the only way a good society can be created."

Do you recognize that argument? I think you should, because it's the same kind of argument the statists use against you. And that is, as far as I can tell, the basis of your philosophy.

Realise that property is a lot more complicated than that. You ask me why should you be forced to give anything to this entity called "the people"? Well, I ask you why the people should refrain from taking whatever they need "from you"* (as long as they don't take anything you need for your survival). "Because it's the law? "Because society would not work if they could do that?" Who's law? It certainly appears to be your law, but it's not mine. You sound like statists again.

* They're not really taking anything from you. You have showed me no basis for why you should allowed to own anything, let alone something that other people need to survive. If I live in an anarchy, and I have never signed a contract saying I will respect private property, what right do you have to force me to respect it?

As a sidenote, and I don't want this to be the main issue in the thread: Didn't the European settlers steal the land in the US when they came there? I'm pretty sure it wasn't a voluntary transaction at least. I guess the ancestors of the native americans will be very rich in AC-land. Plenty of other examples of the same thing exist. My point here is not that you should give the land back to the native americans (they are dead anyway, for one), it is that property is a much more complicated issue than you give it credit for.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
As a sidenote, and I don't want this to be the main issue in the thread: Didn't the European settlers steal the land in the US when they came there? I'm pretty sure it wasn't a voluntary transaction at least.

[/ QUOTE ]

I won't guess on the percentages, but lots of the early colonies' land was in fact purchased from its inhabitants. Does Manhattan and string of beads ring a bell?

By the time Lincoln counqered the States and paved the way for US Empire-building, it was being taken by wholesale slaughter.

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
You ask me why should you be forced to give anything to this entity called "the people"? Well, I ask you why the people should refrain from taking whatever they need "from you"* (as long as they don't take anything you need for your survival).

[/ QUOTE ]
Why the parethetical? States (what you are calling "the people") very often take and expend the lives of their citizens for their own ridiculous purposes -- do you think all the Americans that were sent to die in Vietnam did it voluntarily?

In answer to your question, the state shoud refrain from taking whatever it wants (including my life and freedom) from me personally because I am (along with others) prepared to revolt and kill in defense of my life if things get ugly enough. The situation has been identical throughout history -- states WILL take exactly what they feel they can get away with while retaining their power. It is precisely the societies that have been most intolerant of forced confiscation (i.e. the ones with most respect for property rights) that have been most successful.

[wtfsvi]

You're counter-attacking to the wrong side. I am not a statist.

[AlexM]

You obviously don't understand the slightest thing about AC.

Do you realize that most schools of AC thought do in fact place limits on property right? In fact, you might want to read what it says about property in the AC FAQ in the sticky because it's nothing like what you seem to be saying.

[kidcolin]

real anarchists hop trains, live in squatting communes, and live off stolen Odwalla products, amirite OP?

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
You're counter-attacking to the wrong side. I am not a statist.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe there are any attacks in my post -- I pointed out that a parenthetical was not needed, and answered a direct question posed in your post.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're counter-attacking to the wrong side. I am not a statist.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe there are any attacks in my post -- I pointed out that a parenthetical was not needed, and answered a direct question posed in your post.

[/ QUOTE ] No. I said the people. You translated that to mean "the state". I didn't mean the state.

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're counter-attacking to the wrong side. I am not a statist.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe there are any attacks in my post -- I pointed out that a parenthetical was not needed, and answered a direct question posed in your post.

[/ QUOTE ] No. I said the people. You translated that to mean "the state". I didn't mean the state.

[/ QUOTE ]
I take it you're aware of the easy confusion, since the biggest and most restrictive/invasive states typically masquerade as "the people."

[wtfsvi]

I am. It was a very reasonable misudnerstanding.