PierzStyx

[QUOTE=PierzStyx;6632801][QUOTE=Swordsmyth;6632366]The differences between minarchists and anarchists don't make any difference until we reach minarchy and the anarchists want to go farther, but you don't want us to make any progress or even slow down the decline so you spread division and infighting and tell people not to support candidates that are far better than the alternative because the are supposedly not perfect.[/QUOTE]

1. I'm not talking about anarchy. No one here is. I'm talking about libertarianism, a political philosophy founded on the idea that neither you nor the government have the right to initiate force against anyone. It is opposed to statism -the belief that you have the right to use violence to compel others to obey your orders- in all its forms, no matter whether the list of things you want to force others to do is big or small.

2. That you do not understand number one tells me two things. One, you don't understand anarchy or libertarianism. You constantly conflate the two. And two, it gives me a great deal of confidence in concluding that you do not understand minarchy either.

3. The differences between anarchy and minarchy are fundamental and foundational. Minarchists want to use violence against peaceful people in order to force them obey your orders and violate their freedom. Anarchists do not. Unlike you, anarchists have no list of demands that everyone else must obey or be beaten, caged, or killed for the "evil" of living as a free human being. Everything else flows from this truth.

In reality, there is not much difference between anarchy and libertarianism. Libertarians believe there is still some hope that a formal government can be completely voluntary and function without violating individual liberty. Anarchists are convinced otherwise. That is the only difference.

In contrast, minarchists are not different than Socialists and Fascists. All three ideologies are founded on the belief that you have the right to beat, cage, or kill others for the crime of disobeying the orders of those in power. The only different between the three is they argue over what things they should beat, cage, and kill people over. It is why minarchy is and always has been a fantasy. Once an organization can beat, cage, or kill you for disobeying it, the trend will always be towards totalitarianism. This, in short, is the history of American government, if you can say a government that holds over 5 million people in absolute slavery and uses its vast policing and military powers to compel even those opposed to slavery to support it was ever "small" or minarchist to begin with.

4. As for "supporting candidates," by now everyone with eyes should be able to see the failure of thinking somehow you'll be able to get the State to voluntarily surrender its power or that voting matters. You keep voting for evil and then act shocked when evil wins. It would be laughable if it weren't so damn sad with horrendous consequences.

5. You are not a minarchist anyway. No one who wants to expand the vast police state powers of the US government to hunt, track, beat, cage, and even kill over 11,000,000 people for a nonviolent "crime" could ever be described as minarchist. You are very much for the promotion and expansion of the powers of the State to brutalize, dominate, and steal the life, liberty, and property of private individuals. You're just another regressive Progressive.[/QUOTE]