Lloyd

By what reasoning and evidence have you arrived at the conclusion that landfills are somehow enviromentally toxic?That they're an "eyesore" is merely a subjective matter of aesthetics, so I won't dispute that. Also, I'm curious as to whether or not you've done any research on the process and argument for recycling. For instance, I happen to know from my own studies that the recycling of most metals is both economically productive and an environmental net gain (even assuming the dubious claim that putting a ton of aluminum cans in a landfill would make that landfill more toxic), but I need to see some empirical proof regarding all other forms of recycling. Also, you might want to examine the difference between "the government does X" and the government assumed the role (often the exclusive right) to do X, thereby prohibiting others from doing X. Have you already made this examination? If so, what conclusions have you reached?

Sure, that's their purpose in the market. But to answer the question of who cares seems rather obvious: consumers like us who are interested in truth.

Agreed. I did an audible, epic facepalm when I saw that tripe rolling right before the credits. It's like the guy who put that in thought to himself, "Hey, let's send a message that's completely contradictory to the message of the film!"

Yes, it is on Facebook. Perhaps appropriately, it is called "The Pretence of Knowledge." I am not an admin, merely an active contributor, but I find great value in most of the discussions in that group.

I can empathize with your revelation, Jamie. Hearing eleventy billion explanations from the great flapping forehead as to how the DRO model could work was the argument from effect which allowed me to let go of minarchism.

I followed this planned march on Facebook for about a week. Let me just state for those who may have not read Kokesh's stated intentions that he is actively planning to be arrested along with everyone who joins him. However, the more disturbing message is his intention that there will be blood if those doing the arresting are not respectful and non-violent. I think that sentiment kind of illustrates his rational disconnect with the inherent nature of the police state. Thankfully, he only plans on going forward with this march if he gets 10,000 people to join him (iirc), so I doubt this march will actually occur. For the record, reading most of the discourse on that Facebook event page will leave you recoiling in moral horror. However, I have netted one young, liberal lady into an Austrian/AnCap discussion group as a result, so my suffering was potentially worth it.

For the most part such is already present in the form of my academic writings over the years. Certainly this isn't comprehensive, and it's not a self-conscious record of my development, but rather one can see this process unfolding through the writings themselves--something often corrupted by memory and nostalgia when such efforts are self-consciously directed. Still, the idea has merit.

Okay, so I've come to what may be the final turning point in my lifelong struggle with understanding my relationship with the state. This has not been an easy journey for me. I've certainly left a lot of so-called "friends" and family behind me in the past as my understanding of the nature of man and the state has grown and evolved. I've sought out so many sources to expand my understanding that now I think I've finally spanned a decent (though certainly not comprehensive) breadth of human thought on the subject. I entered adult life in an apolitical and utterly ignorant state. I quickly became a cookie-cutter liberal in my first bout with college. By the end of my military service, I no longer held many illusions regarding the logical consistency of that particular set of wildly contradictory beliefs and values. For a moment, I flirted with conservatism as Burke was fairly persuasive, and certainly far more rational than what I'd already known. It couldn't withstand logical scrutiny very long. During my second bout with college, I began to do a LOT of reading in political philosophy, and began to dip my feet in the waters of economic theory. Libertarianism, for a long while now, has been the most rational sense I could make of these matters, but that too could not last forever. Almost invariably it seems, the moral and logical pursuit that one begins when one starts to understand the principles underwriting libertarian theory leads one to the final conclusion that the state is, at best, a necessary evil. A rational understanding of the history of the state coupled with these principles, and derived from these studies, however, must invariably lead one to objective reality: the state is not only an agent of moral evil, but completely unnecessary. Anarchy is the only moral system under which people can live in freedom. Thanks, Stef, for helping to lift that last bit of fog.