ausppc

Sorry for getting (and staying) off topic... But Jeff Berwick is ok, it seems that he offended some tsa actor's sensibilities by referring to such people as thieves when they took some guy's duty free goods. Other than the inconvenience, there were no other repercussions, just a plain tsa tantrum. Although, his extra time there gave him an opportunity to help someone pay a surprise $150 fee that could have stranded them at the airport.

I think our little misunderstanding has come from an attempt at wordplay that I made in this facebook exchage. When I was agreeing with my friend, I was only agreeing on the point about imposition.If this doesn't take us too far off point, I'd like to ask: If, in an instant, 100% of human interaction became 100% voluntary and nothing else changed, would you still characterise society as completely lacking stability and prosperity?

Jeff Berwick, the guy that did The Anarchast interview with him, has very recently been pulled off a flight back to Mexico by criminals doing business as tsa. https://www.facebook.com/jberwick/posts/10152496834040041

There's a youtube channel called The Anarchast that I've been checking out and recently That Guy T was interviewed - Anarchast Ep. 137 That Guy T: Zombies made me an Anarchist! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npv9bkGDbKQ He seems to have a fairly well maintained online presence as well as a sense of humour - Feminists be like... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBJF9cmud8k https://twitter.com/_ThatGuyT https://www.facebook.com/ThatLibertarianT

I wouldn't be too quick to tar the entire gay community or even the Pride event committee for this. They're a tight knit community out of necessity and I'll bet dollars to donuts that there's a reactive feminist element in that committee that brought this outcome.

To paraphrase: 'Taxation lacks the quality of illegality because the government does it and therefore isn't theft'. Someone's been getting their inspiration from Richard Nixon.

ok. This is where a little more feedback helps. In what you quoted back to me, we're focused on two different things. Please forgive me for not wanting to draw a line through the shades of grey that describe the various quantities and qualities of stability and prosperity. Some people, like my facebook friend, will argue that society is stable and prosperous, others will take the opposite position. But what I was focused on was the imposition of order and that my friend even recognised that it is imposed. Also, I may well be too concise for some on this forum but I much perfer that to being tl;dr.

Well thank you very much! <minor winge> That sure beats how I seem to be attracting negative reputation with no meaningful feedback in this thread - not sure what I'm supposed to learn from that... </minor winge> btw Is 'theyounger' a RAW / The Illuminatus! reference?

The law, aside from being Judge Dredd's porn name, is an opinion backed by a gun. Whether theft, murder, rape, kidnapping... be deemed legal or illegal makes no difference to the people victimised in these ways. Try not to confuse legal with moral - allowing statist mind tricks to inform the perception of right and wrong leads people into labyrinthine bs.

I forgot to post this the first time... If you don't want to fight the tax fight but still want to stick it to 'em, check out the affidavit of fear - http://marcstevens.net/projects/affidavitoffear/affidavit-of-fear.html I just read a comment elsewhere that jogged my memory and it probably deserves its own thread but, for those having children and also having doubts about the true intentions of others insisting that you register the birth... Wait a while. Wait until you get that demanding, threatening letter in the mail - then you will have actual evidence of coercion to throw back in the face of anyone that claims you or your child consented to anything.

With the NAP in mind, Marc Stevens questions IRS bureaucrats (police, lawyers and so forth) on a regular basis. He often refers to Lysander Spooner and, just recently, I had occasion to broadcast a Spooner quote too - http://ondemand.4zzzfm.org.au/the-little-v/2014-06-21 There's a lot of material on Marc's site: http://marcstevens.net and he has a long running, weekly radio show here: http://lrn.fm/shows/#NSP He's even had Stephan as a guest a few times in the past.

OP, are you objective enough to know the difference between working and indulging a hobby? Do you have any siblings? I ask because I'm curious about their opinion of your lifestyle.

The key word there is imposition.

I think it would help if we're both clear about the meanings of the words we're using. First, I go out of my way to separate anarchy and socialism. To me, anarchy is best understood by its root meaning: no ruler(s). If it helps to equate that concept with something else, think about whether a particular interaction is voluntary. Perhaps you won't easily share this point of view but, to the extent that someone enjoys voluntary interaction and seeks to resist, reduce and / or remove involuntary interaction from their life, they are an anarchist. Again, the idea that true freedom means freedom for strong aggressors at the expense of all the freedom of weaker people is actually the opposite of freedom - it's oppression. I do agree with you about the imposition of order but I don't agree that it's the only way to achieve a stable, prosperous society.

Marc Stevens is an anarcho-capitalist that focuses on legal material / the legal system - he has a very comprehensive site, lots of freely available content to check out - http://marcstevens.net/

He's clearly operating on different definitions of various words so that has to be cleared up before he and I can go any further on this topic. re: Why are we friends? As I see it, we have a common background, he's intelligent, talented and often posts interesting material on his areas of expertise. btw I'll get right onto a reply to him just as soon as the No State Project ends.

Anarchy can be made to work, but it's massively inefficient. Who wants to live in a rural hamlet growing all their own food, and never being more than ten metres away from a firearm in case somebody else decides it's easier to steal? I'm not a farmer or a policeman. Consider for a second why true anarchism/socialism doesn't scale up much further than kibbutzim. If you could wave a magic wand, and dissolve all authority and all borders, it would be utter chaos, and billions would starve and die. I think I understand what true freedom means for me, and I don't want it. Authority is order imposed on the people; and order is freedom to specialize and earn my living and do so comfortably, knowing I only have to be good at one thing to look after my family and stay alive long enough to reproduce. Unfortunately, time differences are against me so I'll be sleeping on my response.

Killing the ego / subconscious is also part of the story in Peaceful Warrior. I always get a laugh out of the bridge scene in that movie. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438315

On facebook I have a friend from high school that I respect for the way he has succeeded in life but he often posts things that reveal an all too typically statist mindset. The most recent example is a comment on the Amazon / codespaces hack: Ouch. At least they didn't give in to the criminals. A good case for pervasive mass surveillance if I ever saw one - stories like this really do tickle my authoritarian instincts. To which I somewhat churlishly replied: Meaningful security is too hard so let's pre-emptively punish everyone at their own expense. Authority for the win. His next: Any notion that anarchy could last forever on the Internet is mistaken. Human nature dictates it. Absolute freedom always fails, because complete freedom permits the strong to deprive others of their freedom. And my most recent... Forgive me if I don't quite follow the extrapolation from internet anarchy to absolute freedom in every other aspect of life but, to me, the idea of absolute freedom resulting in denial of freedom presents the same logical problem as saying 1 = 0 The statement / equation is either wrong or incomplete and, if zero freedom is the result, it suggests there was no absolute freedom to begin with. The idea that freedoms can only ever be diminished also alludes to the conflation of anarchy with chaos. Those two things are not the same but taking them that way certainly plays into the hands of those that do the most to erode what few, small freedoms remain. Feel free to comment! I'll keep adding his posts and mine if there's any interest.

http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2014/06/19/bill-shorten-arrested-and-interviewed-by-sexual-crimes-squad-regarding-alleged-rape-of-16-yr-old-girl/

They're keeping the value but they want that value in a form that is more familiar to them. I'm curious how this kind of thing is accounted for... I can just picture a ledger entry somewhere that reads something like 'Seized items' but I can't think of any legitimate businesses that would have ledger entries like that. Goes to show it's good to be the king.

What free market? In the same manner of question, can anyone name a geographic locaton upon which capitalism is currently practiced?

Hello Alex. I'm pretty new to freedomainradio and content Stefan offers but it complements other material I'm more familiar with. btw Is Freeman your family name or is it some other reference?

Hey Marco, what's your poison? Er, that is, choice of OS, languages etc?

I saw it on facebook in the last fortnight - which seems to be enough time for any post to disappear from reference. I'm told the quote was originally taken from a call-in show but I don't know which one. As I mentioned in my other post, I'd really like to get that audio. btw I've seen that other quote you mentioned but I think it went like this:Stefan MolyneuxPatriotism: "Ask not how to ride a unicorn, ask how the unicorn can ride you!"As I understand it, the unicorn reference is about notions of states, nations, citizens etc boiling down to belief / fantasy. Pretty stupid thing to die for, eh?