Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Amash>Trump
ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ЄCΤΙΝ ЄξΟΥCΙΑ ЄΙ ΜΗ ΥΠΟ ΘЄΟΥ
"Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping graven images" - Ironman77
"ideas have the potential of being more powerful than any army....The concept of personal sovereignty was pulled screaming from the ether into this reality by the force of men believing in a self evident truth, that men are meant to be free." - The Northbreather
"Trump is the security blanket of aggrieved white men aged 18-60." - Pinoy
Well. This is why I offered the question regarding whether I can manufacture and sell chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons in ancap world. The points which Rev makes here must be presented in order to be acknowledged. Otherwise they won't be.
Rev, I don't know where you're going with your point with regard to the 2nd. Though, I agree that we dont want communists toppling government. And I agree that any modern revolution will be by that type of group.
The Federalist numbers 28 by Hamilton and 46 by Madison, for example, the assumption and expectation of The Framers was that all States would marshall their forces and act jointly to crush the usurpers' forces.
Key word being 'userpers.'
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 10-20-2017 at 11:45 PM.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Well, I agree that the primary threat is from our existing government.
My point is that raising the black flag and slitting throats, as it were, is no solution.
A popular revolution against this government will - I personally 100% guarantee you - result in an infinitely worse government.
Neither do I, but that wasn't a function of insufficient guns in private hands. There is no amount of guns in private hands which would prevent the federal state from having its way. People like to say that there are more guns in private hands in the US than in the US military, and several other large armies around the world; and that's true, but where is that getting us? The very idea that people who can't be bothered to take five minutes to vote the right way every couple years are going to risk their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" for our cause - or any cause - is absurd.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Here's an ism to ponder given the nature of discussion in the thread. Legitimism.
Rev's having a different discussion than may be apparent to the casual passer-by. Though, to the point you're debating with him, he's correct in his assessment that people don't generally bother themselves about things of this significance. While the populace may certainly have plinkers tucked away in a drawer some place, the populace cares largely about the football game instead. Surely, you must agree. The only such discussion on the topic exists among small communities such as this. And even within such communities, the capacity to participate in them fruitfully, whether right or wrong in one's approach, belongs to the few. I'm generally speaking here so my thought isn't directed toward you or anyone in particular, so please don't take offense. It's nothing you said that reminded me of that, but more what Rev is hinting in his postings to the topic. Rev is, again, echoing the wisdom of Mises. Though, indirectly so. Which seems to be second nature. It's worth a rep for guiding the discussion toward the more relative level of discourse but I'll owe him one.
To his point...
...It took the defeat suffered by the old regime in the battle against liberalism to teach its adherents the truth that there is nothing in the world more powerful than ideologies and that only with ideas can one fight against ideas. They realized that it is foolish to rely on arms, since one can deploy armed men only if they are prepared to obey, and that the basis of all power and dominion is, in the last analysis, ideological. - Mises.
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 10-21-2017 at 02:52 AM.
This thread kind of went in a different direction… But I want to get back to a couple earlier posts.
I would put it a different way. I don't own you and you don't own me. I don't own your stuff and you don't own my stuff. I also agree, of course, that the government doesn't own you or me.
So I agree, if we are talking about the proper relationship of man to man, in regard to force. That said, imo if you're basing an entire political philosophy on that one point, then you're going to have problems, because that is a very incomplete view of reality.
I may not have read every single one of your posts, but since I joined this thread I haven't seen you refute the point that anarchy and capitalism are oxymorons in practice. If you have addressed that, please link me to the post. If you don't feel like getting into that topic anymore, no worries.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
Agreed. :thumbsup:
And of course it isn't just about the fact that shoes and beans are made better by the market but also why they are made better by the market-- competition and free will-- things that not only benefit the shoes and beans industry but all industries. The state is a rule enforcer not a property securer. Its innovation and theorization will go towards enforcing rules and not securing property. It does not share the same priorities as the property owner. The property owner wants security. The market is respondent to demand. Innovation and theorization would go towards securing property and not enforcing rules.
The thing is, anarchism (generally, statelessness) and capitalism (the free exchange of goods and services) are not "oxymorons", or incompatible, or in any way at odds with each other. The proof is right there in front of your eyes, lily. You exchange goods and services without the intervention of the State every single day, broadly speaking. Sure, the State intervenes in terms of the price you pay for goods and services (through "taxation" and regulation, both in the terms by which vendors provide certain goods and services and in artificial price controls), but at ground-level, you identify a particular good or service which meets your needs, you select a vendor to provide the aforementioned good or service, and you hand over money to secure said goods or services. There is no need nor use for the State in this freely agreed-upon exchange. That is, effectively, anarcho-capitalism.
I'm not interested in childish semantics arguments where we haggle over the definition of "anarchism", or "capitalism", or anything else. I don't have time for that. I have a few days off so I'm hanging out in this forum for the fun of it - we're (presumably) all adults here, and I assume none of us have time for trivialities. I work a serious job, with real-world demands. I'm not going to waste my time, even when I have it to spare, debating the definition of words. When I use the word "anarchism", I expect that people - ESPECIALLY PEOPLE HERE - understand what I mean by that word. No one here is advocating chaos. No one here is advocating macro-statism, at least not intentionally. So I'm not going to spend my time explaining myself, that I advocate a thoughtful statelessness, which can be differentiated from minarchism in only the slightest terms. That is a waste of my time. I get where the minarchists here are coming from - I understand their point of view because I once held it myself. So when NC condescends to tell my I don't know what I'm talking about, or tells me that I need to read more... Whatever. I've done my reading. I'd gamble that I've read everything NC has read and probably more so. Or, maybe not. I don't care. I'm not here for a dick-measuring competition. I have a firm grasp of the logic and consequences behind what I understand to be true about human society.
And here's the real secret of this debate - none of it matters. Nothing is going to change. We anarchists and minarchists and even the Trumpists... we're waves upon the rocks. We're pushing back the ocean with a broom. Because the fact is, people want to be ruled, AND they want to RULE. And they will. History has bent inexorably toward democracy, and people will have it to such a degree that they will inevitably kill themselves. So we can argue over the merits of statelessness and micro-statism, but what we're REALLY doing is arguing over the number of angels on the head of a pin. In other words, it doesn't matter, and it's not going to change.
But it's good for a laugh, at the end of the day. Cheers.
Know how you avoid all of that? Oppose the State.
You've set yourself upon the path to totalitarianism, the Total State.
I can't believe that you can't see that.
You've set the State upon the world, AND you've stated your opposition to it's overthrow.
You're Frankenstein, sir, and you want your monster to be immortal.
I keep seeing this brought up. I'm not sure why it even needs to be addressed. Capitalism by definition is trade without state interference. In that sense, any intervention by the state, whether by shepherding the currency system or acting as fraud watchdog is hamstringing capitalism.
What on Earth would keep two people or even groups of people free from compulsive authority from trading freely with one another? Places with little or no government jurisdiction are famous for being free trade zones.
Your contention stands on the idea that property is private only if a government proxy (I'd say "thug") is protecting your "property" for you with his gun instead of you protecting your property (no scare quotes) with yours.
If your point is just that anarchy is just impractical, okay then people will choose to take your word for it or not. You're free to portray anarchy as a silly pipedream. But I would contend it's not much more silly than constitutional minarchy, which not only is inachievable without secession, but even then can be seen as the greatest possible potential for evil. Minarchies inevitably eventually hand the powerful products of a mostly-capitalist hybrid economy to a hooligan or cartel of hooligans to achieve their own ends.
Last edited by undergroundrr; 10-21-2017 at 11:05 AM.
Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018
I think you both completely misunderstood why he brought that up. But I'm sure he will reply later, since it was his point. You must realize though, that the 'traditional' anarchists say the same thing, they see capitalism as completely incompatible with anarchism.
Anyway, thank you A Son of Liberty for your reply.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
Exactly. Here is an image of prosperous free trade zone in Somalia. No government interference around. Anyone gets out of line, shoot 'em.
Here is the heavy hand of minarchy in Hong Kong ruining the lives of all but the well connected few.
Somalia - yes, urban areas with zero resources following an imploded archy gonna suck. However, Mogadishu itself (is that where that picture was taken?) is somewhat presided over by a federal government that collects 100s of millions of dollars of taxes every year. One might call it a minarchy.
Hong Kong is beautiful. I really, truly hope it never falls into the hands of a monster. History says all bets are off.
Last edited by undergroundrr; 10-21-2017 at 12:19 PM.
Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018
By the way, in that picture of the free trading fellows in Somalia, I can't help seeing beyond the dirt to something very beautiful at its genesis. It may not go anywhere because of the competing segregationist tribal "governments" that keep the country torn apart, but it's nice to think those guys are catalysts for positive change without knowing it.
Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018
One thing that this thread has shown is that if you're going to reject anarchy as invalid, unlivable, etc. you're going to have to eventually mount a (eerily left-wing-y) valiant defense of the efficacy and even benevolence of the state. It's morbidly fascinating to watch that take place.
Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018
First of all, you have a picture of Martin Luther King in your avatar, who was a despicable socialist.
That aside, there is nothing left wing about supporting government. It is necessary for markets to operate. In order for trade to take place on a grand scale, there has to be predictable rules and ways to settle disputes that are generally accepted. Otherwise trade will only take place on a small scale, tribal level where high trust exists.
Connect With Us