Robert Stempien

Fractional reserve banking is by definition deceptive, if everyone is fully aware of the fact that their money isnt in the bank then it is not a bank but a very poor investment vehicle, like buying stocks only with a lot more risk and not a lot of return.

Ask them if it would be ok for a private company to tax people, and if not, then why is it ok for the government? For most people to realize that an activity done by the state is bad they must first picture a non-state entity doing it.

Ultimately the constitution and the government are illigitimate, but it might be possible to slow down the state a bit by pointing out that their massive size and athoritatrianism even violates their own rules.

I think Mises regression theorome would basically come to pass, we would start out bartering everything, and then one of the commodities bartered would come to be excepted by almost everyone, so it would become feasible to make an indirect trade into that commodity for everything. After that people would start keeping their commodity in a decentralized network of full reserve banks for safe keeping and the banks would issue wherehouse recipts denomiated in the commodity. (ie grams of gold) these wherehouse recipts could be paper notes, annonymous digital tokens similar to bitcoins, and debit cards. Perhaps a more annonymouse version of the debit card could develop that when scanned just deposits the digital tokens in the amount needed, leaving no personal info attached. Infact, with no IRS, money laundering, or business licensing laws perhaps completely annonymous banks could develop, so no personal info would be attached to the account at all. The only time where this could get dicey is if the banks attempt fractional reserve banking, but hopefully this could be caught and punished as fraud in a free society.

Nice, I think Libertarians can use "running for office" as a way of educating people though, they shouldnt even try to get elected though.

I thought Minarchists atleast attempted to follow the non-aggression principle? No by competition I mean by the way firms compete on the market, my question was if I would be able to start a PDA that competes with the government military within its border. What if your house was inluded as part of this organizations land? Ok, thats a blatent violation of the NAP, but from the sound of things that probably doesnt matter to u. If everyone around you does not respect the NAP then it is no longer a Libertarian society, it is now a statist one. Then the burden of proof is on you for explaining why we must obey the criminal organization calling itself the state but not the criminal organization calling itself the mafia. The fact that theres limited resources simply helps make the case for a stateless society, for only the market can create the most efficient allocation of resources. Ok I guess thats a loaded question. Well, I have a house, and Obama has a house, so I guess I have just as much a claim to rule as Obama does. The Mafia tends to have as much land as the Feds, a small headquarters as a home base for them to branch out and harass private property owners from. I think your the wrong person for these questions, they are more meant for a commited minarchist or objectivist than someone who seems to comfortable with open ended state power.

I posted this originally on my blog but it did not get much exposure, so im reposting it here. 10 Questions Minarchists Should Ask Themselves Try and get these questions to any Minarchists you know. I want them to think hard about each of these. 1) If you were to find a functioning Voluntarist society that does not violate the NAP, would you attempt to impose a Small Government on them? 2) If your Small Government was funded voluntarily, wouldn't it be legal to compete with it? 3) Would you be alright with a group of individuals having a violent monopoly on police, military, and courts, if said organization did not call itself the state? 4) Would a Minarchist Government punish people for practicing tax evasion? 5) If it is OK for a state to secede from the federal government, then wouldn't it be OK for a county to secede from a state, or even, for an individual to secede from the government and declare his house a sovereign independent country? 6) What is the functional difference between a small government and a small benevolent Mafia? 7) Why can't a market function without a socialist, centrally planned monopoly sponging off it? 8) Do you loose sleep at night with the thought that you support a relationship that you know is abusive? 9) If I called myself a small government would I be able to steal from you just to support a small military, police and courts to prevent other people from stealing from you? 10) If a Mafia started calling itself a state and limited its functions to defending the people it stole "Protection" money from, would you be alright with it? If you are a Minarchist reading this, answer all the questions. If you are a Voluntarist, come up with your own ten questions for Minarchists.

Whenever someone says that to u, ask them, "Why doesn't the state just leave?" I said it to this emotional liberal once and she got very mad.

Very interesting if that's true about Rothbard's view on this. I wonder if Libertarians and Anarchists take that view seriously or kind of just ignore it. As you say, this issue would have huge implications with the US and Native Americans for example, with many well-documented examples of broken treaties and so on that could probably be shown. I think, at least for philosophical consistency, this issue can't be totally ignored. I believe Walter block has written about it, I don't think other libertarians have taken it seriously, but they probably just haven't heard the argument, Rothbard has written so much that its hard to read everything he has written. I myself am prepaird to pay restitution to a Native American if they demonstrate proof that my house was stolen from their ancestors. its possible though that a lot of Native Americans could be persuaded to not press charges

does anyone know if this will be able to be printed by a rep-rap printer eventually? cause that is the 3d printer that looks the most promising to me

I think Murray rothbard suggested that if one person can show recorded proof that land was taken from his ancestor by the ancestor if the current owner than that owner would have to give back the land or pay it back in restitution. So rothbard basically compromised and said land should only be returned as far back as the records go. If u want to be real technical though, everyone in the United states who isn't a Native America most likely owns land that started as being stolen from a Native American

I watched a Bryan Caplan speech once where he talked about public opinion and where it lines up with Libertarianism. According to his statistics things are not looking good, infact I got incredibly depressed as I watched it, the only Libertarian position people seem to be agreeing with is legalizing pot. Honestry, im hoping a bank run and currency collapse happens someday, and hopefully a Democrat will be in power, that way the blame will be laid squarely at socialism and central bankings feet.

I have one Industrial Music album for sale, it only appeals to certain people, so you may not like it get it here Physical cd's are coming soon. I have afew Science Fiction short stories for sale here I include no DRM on these and I try to release them as far into the public domain as I legally am able to, they are all under CC0. Go ahead and share these with your friends, and upload them to sharing sites like the pirate bay.

I got into politics when I was in 7th grade the same way most young men do, by copying my fathers beliefs, only, when I asked him if he was a Republican or a Democrat he said, Im a Libertarian. So I decided I too was a Libertarian, it seemed like a philosophy I could get behind, legalize drugs, get rid of gun laws, and shrink taxes and government. My dad is what he calls a "Little-l Libertarian" he felt that taxation is theft but a small amount is a necisary evil, that the free market can handle most things but not things like justice or defense, and that we can only focus on gradual change in the short term. Naturally I agreed with this, until one day, I discovered an essay that would change my life forever, "No Treason, The Constitution of No Athority" by Lysander Spooner. until then I had held firm to Constitutionism, I was sure that if we all agreed to the arbitrary line of permisible government outlined in the Constitution based on "Consent of the Governed" then we would all be fine. No Treason destroyed that notion. Unfortunatily, it took me longer still to be convinced of Voluntarism, it took quite afew individuals works to convince me, Heinlein's "The Moons a Harsh Mistress", Marc Stevens, Murray Rothbard, Walter Block, and of coarse, Stefan. By 9th grade I had realized that the state is just a fiction, just a criminal gang that we all are in an abusive relationship with. I'm now almost 18, and I have a passon for change, to convince people of the abusive relationship we all have with the mafia that calls itself the state.