Omegahero09

Of course he isn't an idol, but he is certainly important. I put posters up of bands, people, ideas, and even jokes that I like, why can't I throw in a little of Stefan's bald head too ya know?

Damn maybe it is as grim as we fear it is currently. I knew of Galt's Gulch Chile, but not of freestateproject. Seeing your guys' responses makes me think that perhaps the best way to attempt to peacefully exist apart from the state is to secede from the presiding country on some level. Be that from a neighborhood level, or state/province level, or somewhere in between. And dsayers, you've got it right on the money man. Ooof, careful man. Bandit-minded people may attempt to do this, but not civilized rational folks. Anecdotal time! I will go out on a careful limb here and tell you I work for a pharmaceutical (the irony!) company- in a city between the ghetto and middle-class suburbs. The state is absolutely responsible on every level for the defense and dispute resolution of persons and property except for immediate self-defense. This means- if while I'm going about my business stocking shelves and I see a guy walk up to a coke cooler, take out a sprite, and walk out the door- I can't legally chase him, or even accuse him of stealing or myself and my company could be taken to court for harassment. And since the government operates on a "patching" resolution level instead of prevention, this creates a perfect environment for small-time theft. I've heard of sister stores more south of my location- who have regular thieves who wait for the store to open everyday, so they can walk in, steal breakfast, energy drinks and even cigarettes. Cops can't/won't do anything, and it isn't worth the time or money for all parties to prosecute. Because the state has monopolized the use of force and even most degrees of self defense, and converted courts from dispute resolution to mostly non-violent and victimless crime (because making money by force is easy and fun!), it isn't worth it to proactively defend a company's store and product. The use of force is important here because were my company or her employees to defend her capital in any way that isn't permitted by the state- we would be liable for prosecution from the state, without negotiation. So you see Jagsfan82, even with the state, thieves and bandits can still ignore the register. Adam Kokesh does a lot of great interviews and stories about the corruption of court houses and law enforcement, I highly suggest taking some time and perusing his videos, they are entertaining and Adam is awesome. Hope that clears things up

So I have been thinking a long time about creating a community- somewhere nice and rural. A place where we, being the anarchists that we are, go to live full time as anarchists. A place hidden, where we don't sign, or acknowledge federal papers, where we don't live by rules imposed on us by anything we don't choose to follow; we just live. But I don't know how risky a process this is. How would the country we steal away in, react to our folded arms to anything but trade, peaceful talks and voluntaryism? If careful enough, could we be established enough to invoke sympathy from the well meaning civilians of said country and perhaps change some minds, or at least develop a sympathetic voice in the statist systems there? I'm tempted to think it's possible... but I don't know... I know I would certainly want to move to Anarchyville if there were enough people there to stand with. What does the forum think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_work They must be licensed by the state, and they work for governments and for universities. So there is little context, for at least what I understand that the social worker should, or even could do, so why even put that into your test?As far as your test- it's fubar, beyond getting close to any kind of virtue, regardless of what the social worker does. Hence the problem with outlandish and absurd thought experiments. Like I said before: Try again. Post Script: I should also point out another issue in your test- the social worker has no expressed knowledge (unless it was hidden in your unedited introduction) about the living conditions of Brandy. So the question is... do we... talk to Mary? We're happy to test UPB, but you've got to prepare your test better, or have someone help you edit it. Sorry about the disability.

Additionally you open your ethics test from the standpoint of someone who wields the sword and pen of the government- to anarchists. Try again.

"I am the Tom Cruise of Philosophers" -Stefan Molyneux So true lol

Think about it. foasikjgalrekhbunrlaeubdzvlksd

You totally can, but I think it gets easier the older you are.

Maybe, who knows? I imagine it wouldn't be too different than credit scores, and insurance policies. There has to be a forgiveness system, I'm sure there will be.Maybe after Murderer Bob turns himself in, pays off his debts after working for the DRO for seven years he gets released back into the free-world, with more expensive premiums on his plan. After which maybe he takes advantage of one of the forgiveness programs with the DRO and works with a local church and after a couple years the church (who works with the DRO contractually of course) gives him the stamp of forgiveness and his premiums go down even further.

I think we are confusing what exactly the ostracism would entail- I was under the impression that the DRO and her sibling companies would freeze all assets belonging to the aggressor, and no companies or persons who work with the DRO's in the market would trade with them. Imagine murderer bob after murdering someone, goes to buy a coke, when he swipes his card or checks his phone to pay via app, he notices that his DRO has sent a summons and that his tender has been frozen until the conflict in question has been resolved. And just like that he can't do anything until he turns himself in, or goes someplace where the tender is different, and the community has no affiliation with the DRO's he fled from. Which would be almost impossible, because the DRO's would be huge. Like Visa, Sprint, or Ebay huge. As far as your moral status, what did you agree to? I'm sure it would be in your policy that you sign for the extent of violence the DRO could afflict on you. For myself, would I sign a contract that says within it if I rape someone the DRO can use force to bring me in for resolution? Sure! So long as I have defensive rights within resolution, like restitution if the accusation was false.

I think it's important to note that we have no idea what DRO's will actually look like in the future. The real question is- do you as the hypothetical consumer of the hypothetical DRO want to purchase a service which uses torture as you say, in its practices? I think it will look more like DRO's using proactive measures in prevention of crime: ostracism, sharing of data with other DRO's, and literal protection in the way of armed patrols, emergency responders, escorts etc. Money and time restitution (paying for leave and so on) would be the most rational things to supply the DRO's customers in the event of the occasional crisis. I really doubt there will be free-world 'spooks.' Goons who will go out and club people who rob you, I don't think will be too popular in most of the free world. It's too expensive.

How is control over one's own thought not verifiable? Are you not using your mind to evaluate the ideas in this post, to run them against your ideas and your experiences to form an idea to reply with? Are you not choosing to do these things? Are you choosing to think about this stuff instead of, I don't know, boobs and french fries?

Certainly good sir. The awareness I speak of comes down to understanding that you have choices over what you think and do.A thief is aware that he is a thief, because he is taking something which is not his. I apologize for the confusion in the thoughts end of the definition, let me attempt to clarify myself- We choose what to think. How to think. The thoughts we choose to think (or lack of control thereof) determine us. Animals don't think, they only react. We think. Humans think. We have the capacity of reason- and being aware of that reason gives us freedom to grow, to change. Also yes babies lack self awareness, but they develop it as they grow older.As far as the rapist being responsible- he is responsible objectively. The ownership of an individual's actions is a reality, whether or not anyone is there to hold responsibility to that individual. If the person is insane, and is afflicted with psychosis, then the individual cannot be held accountable because they are incapable of understanding the reality around them and should be cared for I think.

Well I am no expert, however I did state that awareness is necessary for self-ownership. If you don't understand that you are responsible for your actions- like a puppy who cannot understand why his owners are upset at him for peeing in the house- then there is no self-ownership. Awareness of the ownership of self is necessary. Otherwise you are a reaction machine- like the animal.Pardon my not attempting to answer your questions explicitly- a) What is self-ownership? Self ownership is simply the concept that we are aware and responsible of and for our actions and thoughts. b) What would have to be true for self ownership to be false? If we were to discover something which would tell us that we are not responsible for our actions and thoughts, then self-ownership would be false. The classic ideas of fate, predetermination, original sin, and so on, are opposite self-ownership. These ideas are of course, fantasy. c) Finally in trying something akin to Bayes' rules, could the evidence for self ownership be equally or better explained by another theory, i.e self-control, self-awareness, autonomy, e.t.c? I hesitate to answer this question because I don't think we've come to a consensus on what self-ownership is. So I'll just answer it the best I can off of my operative definition. No, I don't think it could be better explained by other theories. Self-control is a result of self-ownership. Self-awareness or sentience is a component of self-ownership. Autonomy is related to self-ownership in that if you decide that you do own yourself, then your autonomy will be different from one who waives their ownership.

Self ownership is simply the concept that we are aware and responsible of and for our actions and thoughts. That's all. It differentiates us from the animal, in that we have the ability of choice and thought.If you waive your self-ownership then you become less than those who wield their ownership. If you seize it then you become free. The mind is just as much property as it's body, one a tool for perception and kinetic action, and the other- is whatever you intend it to be. Whether the mind is used and for what purpose is up to the individual.

There are already people who live how you describe Tyler Durden to live.Almost the entire Hollywood subculture I would submit exists because of the shallow escapism and projections it provides.If you really want to make a living in a creative way, revolving around supplying the demand that shallow people offer- then I'm sure you've already looked into some ideas.Plastic surgery maybe? Are you a chemistry guy? Could you invent a new way to create hairspray, or perhaps fragrances? The cosmetics industry is huge and the mark-up from raw materials to the final product is insane. Perhaps provide a local, cheaper alternative for consumers than the Walgreen's and CVS's out there?Maybe create your own alcohol brand?Own a strip club? Create a social website for people who just want to boink? Those apps and websites are already on the rise. Find something interesting and look into it, there are limitless ideas for making money, and not just around human depravity and shallow tendacies.

Good point.Russia has always been pretty effed too. From one fascist "leader" to another... Of course, it's the classic government trick of inventing a crisis to save it's people from.The scientists are paid via subsidies to 'prove' global warming, to publish aritcles and research which shows it's growing etc etc. Don't tell me that when your college gets a grant for 2 million- just for global warming research alone, that that 2 mil just goes to equipment and stuff. It doesn't, it staffs the college.It's the worst.IMO it's the same with cigarettes too- nearly all the research you find about tobacco comes from government funded studies, or from straight up federal organizations. And gee, tobacco is heavily restricted from every angle- from advertising to the contents of the cigarrettes- including all the harmful drugs required by law to be made into their product.It's all tied in with the cancer industry and it's ties to the fed I think.

There might also be people willing to buy your waste as well, especially depending on where you live.Compost generators are a thing, farmers that have enough livestock can move their animal's waste into underground domes to convert the waste into energy.There are loads of options, just remember- if there is a demand, capitalists will supply it.

Lol I haven't seen any pictures no, just scanning the suite of libertarian/conservative news sites every morning and every night to make sure I don't have to buy MRE's in a hurry if you know what I mean.It's been hard for me to believe that the russians were really pressuring it, I'd have to dig really deep into older articles to find out how exactly everything took place. But all the photographs I've seen have been of cheering citizens, lots of them- wearing russian colors and saluting and what not. I really do think they did want to annex.Either way I think we can all agree though, no war if possible.Putin plz

I personally find the whole thing ironic. If the United States and the EU are truly democratic governments as they tell us in school- then why are they losing their minds over a majority wishing to annex?The whole thing is still kind of goofy, them picking which slave driver they want to rule over them, but I still think it's funny.

Aaaaaand now I'm going to go watch the lego movie

I think the only "endgame player" who could actually realistically affect a free-society in the way you are describing would be an invading nation. And invading nations would have little chance against an an-cap society. Free men will not give up themselves or their property very easily.

If they really cared about people's health, they wouldn't be selling about 90% of what they have behind the counter in the pharmacy. Their position is just a narrow statist position. What they are promoting is a statist "health." It has nothing to do objectively with actual health.

The police I didn't consider. Then there certainly would be a wide divide between the sociopaths, non-thinkers and good people in the enforcer class (great nomenclature by the way) were a conflict to occur. However I think it'd be more of a "we won't trade with you" type of situation, threats to receive no military protection, subsidies etc. It'd be a cold war of sorts. People might become violent, but I doubt blood would shed on the explicit between the former united states and the free states.

I'd have to disagree with you on the coldness bit there- the nazi's were trained to kill puppies they raised in their training, and went along with their ideals for murdering people wholesale. Our training doesn't come close to the evil ruthlessness that was put into the germans of that era. I don't think the military is moral or necessary, but I don't think that just because someone is enlisted or served makes them evil. I don't know about you but I've spoken with lots of veterans and members of the military, and only very few of them I've met were ill-intentioned people. And I do think it would work. Money talks, and people do love liberty even if they don't know it. A libertarian/anarchist succession would drive out those who disagree ideologically- but draw every business and entrepreneur and liberty-loving individual from all over the country. The boon alone would be more than sufficient to get people talking and other states would absolutely follow suit.You really think the patriotic and highly conservative american military will turn on americans? There's just no way I don't believe it.