If it's not a religion why do you react this way to me calling it that? "Taxation is theft" is (dogmatically shallow) tribal signaling just like "believe women" or "God is good".
but hey dude... whatever.. I don't give a shit anymore. I try not to answer any moronic statement made on the internet, it waste my time and energy. have fun talking shit
i cannot answer you, without being a blind zealot? ok. lets not talk. people calling libertarian philosophy and its <logical> conclusions "a religion" 100% DID NOT UNDERSTAND IT.
It's not, but if the person doesn't know why taxation is theft, it might as well be.
"taxation is theft" comes from a logical thoughtprocess. If I have to tell this to you, and explain the process, it means that all those hours spend understanding rothbard were wasted.
If you can't explain it it means you actually don't understand it. OR it's not actually cogent, you just think it is because you sank so much time(and lost so many friends?) over it.
That's called a "sunk cost fallacy" by the way. Just because you spent a lot of time on something does not make it correct, useful or cogent.
No; if you can't explain it, your time was wasted. If you can, it was well-spent.
I know the thought process because I've processed it with thought. I think it's flawed reasoning. If that offends you it's cuz I'm blaspheming your religion. If not you wouldn't be.
What is your counter to the idea that taxation is theft?
So if I dropped you naked in the middle of a forrest a thousand miles from any civilization - you wouldn't be able to clothe yourself, let alone make a gun. Learn to be more thankful!
Let's say you live in a rapist's house, and that rapist was excused to rape you because that's just how things go.
Now, imagine you were in the middle of a forest. Be grateful!
I'm extremely grateful that I eat better than any king could 200 years ago every day, I'm safe, I can move around freely, I can access information freely, I get a day off once a week..
I am too :)
And things could be so much better with consistency applied morality, too :)
In fact, our collective existence depends on it. We will go extinct otherwise.
How much would this service cost? It sounds desirable...
It'll cost you everything!
My lucky day: that's *exactly* what I have.
That'll take a minute. I gotta work! I'll hit you up later.
Pareto principle guarantees that a tiny percentage of the population will end up "owning" most of the land in a free-for-all anarchist society. Maybe ancaps think it'll be them?
Could you explain what a free-for-all anarchist society is?
It would probably look a lot like “Burning Man” if I were to guess 🤔
That's not very helpful.
I haven't been to burning man.
Google and YouTube can be an excellent resource to learn more about places and experiences you haven’t had but are interested in ;)
Yes, and you could also tell me what you mean by "free for all anarchist society".
I don't care about burning man.
I'm asking you what You mean.
Found the words "law enforcement" on there. This is not anarchy.
Isolate them with no food and see what happens next.
They would probably just go find food. Hunt/gather and share as a community because that is the philosophy that Burning Man brings.
lol I thought it was in the desert. I'm saying introduce actual scarcity so people have to start deciding between altruism and personal survival. You'll get a few "criminals", then...
Obviously if you put people in a situation where they have no food or water they are going to start fighting. Law enforcement or anarchy doesn’t matter. Survival can become savage.
Not necessarily starvation level famine, just enough scarcity that there are winners and losers in food production which means inequality. You'll have a government in no time.
I've heard a shepherd does wonders in such a situation.
I have no clue what your meaning by this. Care to elaborate?
People with no resources in the desert are animals, which a shepherd can lead and care for.
“free for all anarchist society” wasn’t a term I used. Sorry I kinda jumped in on your conversation with someone else because when I read that I immediately thought burning man
no no no, please jump in! It's a fascinating topic, I'm still thinking through it.
So... what do you mean by it?
Watch Princess Mononoke, pretty much that. No different than straight up feudalism. If you amass any wealth there'll be raiding parties of samurai at your door every damn day.
And why do you think if you amass wealth they'll be raiding parties of samurai every day?
Why do you think there wouldn't be?
It depends on if people defend taxation, the blind obedience to authority.
That is what enables that.
So what do you think should happen to people who "defend taxation in blind obedience to authority"?
That, if they are so open, they talk with me or someone else who advocates for anarchy, a society where none hold the blind belief in authority?
And how do you propose to achieve that?
By talking with them, as I am currently doing with you.
Perhaps you're right. However, the statement isn't useful in the least because the alternative(feudalism) is much much worse.
What statement?
What do you mean that feudalism is the only alternative?
The statement "taxation is theft" is like a child complaining that it's not fair he has to do chores to get an allowance. As the parent I'd say 'don't let the door hit you in the ass!'
How is "Taxation is theft" like that?
The kid wants the benifits of living in the household he was born in without any obligations. You want the benifits of the society you were born into with none of the trade-offs.
Anarchism becomes feudalism because of the Pareto principle. A small amount of people will own most/all of the land. A monopoly on land ownership is feudalism by definition.
Why would a small amount of people in anarchy own most/all the land?
Haven't convinced me of anything other than that you blindly, dogmatically, definitionally believe to the idea that a tax is necessarily a violent violation of your property rights.
I don't expect to convince you of anything in one conversation. I don't understand how you're concluding that I'm dogmatic about taxation. Could you explain that?
One big problem with "taxation is theft" is that you assume entitlement of all society's structure that you benefit from every damn day. Not saying it's perfect or even very efficient.
How does "taxation is theft" assume entitlement of all society's structure?
If you have your money stolen from you, but they buy you something, that makes their theft ok?
The roads, sewers, electricity, infrastructure to keep it all running etc. etc. - all stuff you used to make that money *in the first place*. Could you have made that money w/o it?
Are you saying that these things cannot be done in a voluntary fashion?
I just watched Princess Mononoke - great film for thinking about this stuff. One takeaway- force multipliers(like guns) require specialization. You don't get steel without society.
I don't know what you mean by force multipliers, nor how society or specialization require government, whatever you mean by those terms.
So like trains - what needs to exist societally to turn iron ore into a functioning train system? How much cheaper is it to transport goods via rail than carrying it on foot to market?
What does this have to do with a voluntary society vs an involuntary society?
That's why pay tribute to Caesar - YOU USED HIS SYSTEM OF COMMERCE TO MAKE THAT MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE <---- Make your money outside that system, then you can say taxation is theft.
What do you mean by "his system of commerce"?
Do you create the money system you use every day? Didi you build the highways and the rails? Why do you think you get to use them for free?
