Search the Community

I've brought up a couple statistics and facts about cops. The domestic violence statistics, how addictive and dangerous power is on the scientific level, how the system is broken (it's immoral, worsens the problems it tries to solve and is a recepie for corruption, violence and injustice), but the party we were at moved forwards and I wasn't able to further the conversation to the NAP. We are hanging out more and more though, and this conversation will come up again. He brought the conversation to me- knowing I'm an anarchist. He is open to reason, and he is willing to talk to just about anyone to learn other points of view. I'm not certain yet if this is an appeasement tactic or a genuine search for knowledge, but either way he dialogues with me so that's a plus. Additionally- he takes correction very well, he conceded a couple points to me, which is why I have hope to bring voluntarism and philosophy to another individual. Does anyone have any experience with these kinds of situations? What works? What doesn't? I'm going to bring up the "against me" argument, as well as Kokesh's "do you own your body" argument. But I want a couple more tools to help illustrate the philosophy. I can bring utilitarian points all day, but I want to avoid those points until after he has universal principles and the NAP down. Any help, would be massively appreciated. I also remember a couple points that he brought up if that helps- he is statist, and he thinks he is a 'bad kid' for the basic spectrum of nonviolent crimes, but thinks he can help and protect he and his family best if he is on the side of the state. He loves the tools of the police, and their ability to hunt and track down drug dealers, as believes that with the growing threat of domestic and Islamic terrorism, that militarizing the police is justified.