Hello!

[Wiltin]

I'm new to the forum community here.

 

I'm a 30 year old guy with a partner of 9 years, we've recently had our first child, a now 8 month old girl. I have found the content on Freedomain Radio very helpful and I'm interested in learning and interacting here. For those who are interested I'll give an overview of my life:

 

I am a New Zealander, raised in a somewhat fundamentalist Christian home. I am the second of 4 boys all very close in age. I was home-schooled for 4 years between the age of 9 and 13 under the ACE curriculum (accelerated christian education). I returned to public schooling at the second year of high school, a year ahead of my age, my brothers were also placed a year ahead respectively. After being isolated at home for so long with very little contact with other children my age I was significantly behind in social development and remained an outsider all through high school. I got my first job when I was 14 working as a cashier after school and weekends. My parents divorced when I was close to 15 and I was given the option to live with either my mother or father. I initially chose to live with my father but it ended up that I and my older brother was sent to live with my grandmother on my father's side instead. I felt unsatisfied with Christianity at this time and became involved with Jehovah's Witnesses because of a crush I had on a girl at school. I ended up moving out into a flat with two (25 and 40+ years old) JW guys at 17 and becoming heavily involved with door to door ministry. I was baptized when I was 19, but by the time I was 20 I had completely separated myself from the organization and essentially considered myself an agnostic. I was depressed throughout my early to mid 20s. I moved into a student hostel at 21, jumped from job to job about every 6 months, working mostly as a laborer in forestry and a little security and customer service. I met my now partner when I was 21 at the student hostel, we moved in together and in 2007 we moved to Australia where we are very happy together. I now work in the parasitic public sector as a comfortably paid bus driver in Brisbane. In the last couple of years I've graduated from agnosticism to atheism. I enjoy playing video games for entertainment and I train and play soccer for an amateur club team every week. Since leaving religion behind I've had an interest in philosophy. I have no very close friends besides my partner, I'm very suspicious and skeptical of most people, I don't have a very high view of human nature. I consider myself a realist and a very principled person. I keep in touch with my family but am no longer particularly close with them. My political views are not yet fully formed. My partner and daughter are my joy and my biggest concern in life.

 

I look forward to interacting with you all.Best Regards,

Josh

[dsayers]

Thank you for sharing. I hope you don't mind if I ask you a few questions and/or offer some insight.

 

I'm a 30 year old guy with a partner of 9 years, we've recently had our first child, a now 8 month old girl.

 

Does your partner have self-knowledge? Do the two of your prioritize self-knowledge? Have the two of you committed to peaceful parenting?

 

After being isolated at home for so long with very little contact with other children my age I was significantly behind in social development and remained an outsider all through high school.

 

I wanted to correct the conclusion that is stated here. First of all, grouping children by age is actually a relatively new practice and one with no perceived benefits. Contrasted to the older model of children of different ages learning together, separation by age actually leads to comparatively reduced social skills.

 

Still, being home-schooled is not causal in lacking social skills. If your parents did not socialize with you or model for you and your brothers socialization, then this is something to be attributed to them. It was their obligation to you to model the social skills needed to function on a planet with 7 billion others.

 

 

I don't have a very high view of human nature

 

Could this be due to a lack of understanding of what human nature is? I recommend checking out The Philosophical Baby by Alison Gopnik. Human nature is unbelievably impressive. Unfortunately, it can mostly be described as adapting and so many people are willing to use aggression towards children, causing them to adapt accordingly. In other words, what you may attribute to human nature is likely not nature at all if it leaves you with a low opinion of it.

 

My political views are not yet fully formed.

 

Have you yet been exposed to the idea of self-ownership? It leads to the understanding of morality and therefore the immorality of government. Politics is just the initiation of force against other people. I found learning these ideas to be incredibly liberating. So if I'm coming on too strong, this is why. Is there anything about this that you do not accept or find challenging?

 

Welcome to FDR!

[Wiltin]

Hi dsayers, I'm answering from my phone so excuse me for being brief.

 

I can't say that we as a couple prioritize self knowledge. My partner does not have self knowledge, no, but she is the happiest person I know and has a fantastic personality. We have committed to not spanking but that is all so far, I realise peaceful parenting commonly extends further than that.

 

Regardless who or what is precisely responsible for social development in children, I was very social at a young age while in school, I was homeschooled for 4 years, on returning to school I was entirely withdrawn and incapable of normal social behavior.

 

Perhaps I should have said human behavior rather than nature. I agree, unhindered human nature is impressive.

 

I think self ownership is a fine thing, I am aware of the immorality of government in principle, but I have not determined if a viable, practical, sustainable alternative is possible in the real world.

 

If you are interested in more detail on domething specific please ask.

[dsayers]

Regardless who or what is precisely responsible for social development in children, I was very social at a young age while in school, I was homeschooled for 4 years, on returning to school I was entirely withdrawn and incapable of normal social behavior.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by regardless. You had attributed it to being home schooled. If the source is not to be regarded, why make the connection?

 

I think self ownership is a fine thing, I am aware of the immorality of government in principle, but I have not determined if a viable, practical, sustainable alternative is possible in the real world.

 

You live a life where you meet all of your goals without initiating the use of force against others, but are uncertain if an absence of coercion is possible in the real world? So just in case, we should have institutionalized, pseudo-legitimate coercion?

 

For what it's worth, I think it's dangerous to reproduce with/as somebody that doesn't prioritize self-knowledge. Also, to agree to not spank only is just plain dangerous. Preparation is a requisite of doing something right/well. What could be more important than guiding/shaping another human being?

 

If you don't mind me asking, what method do you use to determine what is true and what is not?

[Wiltin]

I'm not sure what you mean by regardless. You had attributed it to being home schooled. If the source is not to be regarded, why make the connection?

 

 

I was trying to be brief since I was replying from my phone. I think social development in children is important and there are likely a large variety of variables. I think you make a good point about the parents' responsibility to model healthy social behavior.

 

Still, being home-schooled is not causal in lacking social skills.

 

 

If I were homeschooled by different people, in a different environment, with a larger community around, then I'm sure in that case being homeschooled wouldn't have had a negative impact. My particular homeschooling arrangement was causal, and I'm quite sure of that .

 

You live a life where you meet all of your goals without initiating the use of force against others, but are uncertain if an absence of coercion is possible in the real world? So just in case, we should have institutionalized, pseudo-legitimate coercion?

 

 

I'm not suggesting that I think government is necessary. I am reserving judgement deliberately because I haven't formed political views.

 

For what it's worth, I think it's dangerous to reproduce with/as somebody that doesn't prioritize self-knowledge. Also, to agree to not spank only is just plain dangerous. Preparation is a requisite of doing something right/well. What could be more important than guiding/shaping another human being?

 

 

My partner's mind is filled with nothing but rainbows and butterflies, she is very happy and has a great personality in all the areas that I think matter for raising children. Generally speaking self knowledge is something people seek in order to mend problems within their life or to better understand the negative impact of their history on their personality, habits, and so on. It is one of my goals in life to ensure that my partner is never put into a position where she needs to do that, because in that case she would be unhappy on some level.

 

I'll reply with regard to our preparation for child rearing a little later, off to work. I'll just say that your tone seems a little condescending, though I realize this may be a misapprehension on my part.

[Wiltin]

We decided we would like to raise children together at some point about 2 years into our relationship. We prioritized first owning a home and one of us having a reasonable secure income so that the other could be a stay at home parent. We also felt at that time that we were too young and we agreed that we would wait until my partner was 25 at minimum. It took us 6 years before we were satisfied that we were ready for our first child. We stopped using contraception and my partner was pregnant 2 weeks later at age 26. We are planning to have 1 more child as a maximum because we want to be able to invest enough into each of them to give them the best chance at success in life. I'm very confident in our prospects and I'm here to learn more.

[dsayers]

We are planning to have 1 more child as a maximum because we want to be able to invest enough into each of them to give them the best chance at success in life.

 

I was really happy to read this. I've often wondered how detrimental it is to have multiple children or to have multiples too close together.

 

It was not my intention to condescend. You mentioned having a child and I saw several items in your posts that I thought could be interpreted as imprecise. My interest is also in the best chance at success in life for your child, so I'm asking question to try and help them in that regard.

 

I disagree that self-knowledge is only for people who have been abused. I also disagree with the claim that any adult could not classify as abused. Even those who grew up in a loving, nurturing, virtuous household eventually leave the nest and live in a very coercive world. As such, I have a hard time believing the rainbows and butterflies remark.

 

Anyways, the important thing is that you have a child. If you or your partner lack self-knowledge, this is going to lead to bad decisions. Parents have done a LOT of damage when they thought they were doing good. It comes down to: How do you know? Somebody who has self-knowledge has the integrity to provide for their bias. To scrutinize a subject rationally. Take your lack of political views for example. Any imprecision you do not make an effort to correct is one you will pass onto your child. This is a strike against their chance at success if they're not taught rational thought and moral importance.

 

I hope we will be able to continue this conversation.

[Wiltin]

Yes the rainbows and butterflies remark was a stretch, she has what I'd call a child-like enthusiasm and positivity toward life, that I feel protective of.

 

I agree with your point about self knowledge, my partner and I have discussed her past and her relationship with each parent. Her mother is mentally ill and abused severely as a child in and out of various horrific foster home environments. Her mother was abusive mainly toward her other siblings, so she saw plenty of terrible things in her home. She has a positive relationship with her father, which is nice.

 

So not completely devoid of self knowledge, she is very cautious about not repeating the cycle of abuse.

 

To your point about passing on imprecision to my children, I'm not sure I agree. I don't think it would be sensible to try to be correct on every issue so that you can pass on those correct views to your children in an inherited fashion. Isn't it more important to be open minded as a parent? Rather than focus on passing on your correct views, instead provide an environment where your children have access to as much information as possible and the freedom to reason for themselves? Nobody is correct on every issue and all things should be subject to question. I'm quite happy to have unformed views and uncertainty in particular areas and I think that in itself is something worth modelling for a child.

[dsayers]

Yes, inflicting conclusions onto children is far inferior to teaching them how to reason, which will lead to them coming to their own correct conclusions. Where I was coming from is that the State is immoral is a fairly easy one. To not have views not fully formed or be willing to dispense with the moral consideration for utility's sake is poor methodology. I'm urging you to sort that one out before your child is old enough to understand that daddy missed an easy one.

 

How does your partner feel about her siblings being abused by their mother? What does she think about the fact that that was their mother only because their father chose her to be?

[Wiltin]

Alright, well thanks for the advice. As for my partner's feelings, I don't feel like it is my place to spray them wantonly about on public forums. I don't agree that the only reason her mother is her mother is because her father chose her to be. She would not exist at all had the slightest thing been biochemically different on the night of her conception. Infact, she would not exist at all if a particular blade of grass had grown on the African planes for an antelope to eat, for just enough energy to move within sight of a hunter, for the hunter to kill, for the hunter's child to eat, for the child to survive the winter, for the child to eventually grow up and give birth to one of my partner's ancient ancestors. Your concern for the welfare of my family is noted but this is a public forum and I think I've given a fair overview of my situation for the purposes of our interaction here. I appreciate your interest.

[dsayers]

I don't agree that the only reason her mother is her mother is because her father chose her to be. She would not exist at all had the slightest thing been biochemically different on the night of her conception. Infact, she would not exist at all if a particular blade of grass had grown on the African planes for an antelope to eat, for just enough energy to move within sight of a hunter, for the hunter to kill, for the hunter's child to eat, for the child to survive the winter, for the child to eventually grow up and give birth to one of my partner's ancient ancestors.

 

You misunderstand, which ties nicely into my inquiry from the beginning.

 

Her father chose her mother to have children with together and vice versa. If one of them is abusive to their offspring, they both are because the other chose to reproduce with them before making sure it was a secure endeavor. This is precisely why I asked about self-knowledge in the first place. If you or your partner lack self-knowledge, or do not commit to peaceful parenting, then the other one has endangered your offspring by choosing to mate with them.

 

Crossing your fingers and hoping for the best doesn't work. A human life is too important and has unbelievably far reaching consequences if done wrong to just wing it. Being a parent is more than just stacking some cash and having a house already.

[Wiltin]

I feel like you resent me dsayers, I sniffed it early on in this conversation. I'm sorry if your history or choices have left you feeling like you've fallen behind in the road to a happy family life of your own. I could reply to your latest accusation but I think it will just lead to another, and another. My life isn't perfect but I'm proud of my decisions and I won't be forced into a blame game or self-attack.

[dsayers]

I don't know you. I only know of your words and the behaviors they represent. Perhaps you made it personal as a way to justify marginalizing it?

 

It was my mistake. I approached this thread under the assumption that somebody that would post on FDR sought the truth, understanding, precision, etc. I apologize if this was in error or a result of my own wishful thinking or projection.

[Wiltin]

I'll explain why your whole assessment of the situation is wrong and why I'm cutting this conversation off only for the sake of onlookers, I'm not interested in continuing a discussion with you.

 

Peaceful parenting:

 

A survey asking parents if they consider themselves "a peaceful parent" would return a near 100% positive result. "Peaceful parenting" is a vacuous, subjective sound bite. Of course my partner and I are committed to peaceful parenting, what is the alternative? Combative parenting? I deliberately avoided saying we were committed to peaceful parenting because you were obviously referring to a particular parenting methodology put forward by experts, more precisely: a fad parenting model. No we are not committed to a fad parenting model.

 

My partner's parents:

 

They started their family at age 18 and 19 without any planning whatsoever. I had 7.5 years with my partner before she got pregnant, I think I'm in a fine position to judge her personality and stability. There is no parallel.

The immorality of government:

 

I said, "I am aware of the immorality of government in principle, but I have not determined if a viable, practical, sustainable alternative is possible in the real world."

You said, "Where I was coming from is that the State is immoral is a fairly easy one. To not have views not fully formed or be willing to dispense with the moral consideration for utility's sake is poor methodology. I'm urging you to sort that one out before your child is old enough to understand that daddy missed an easy one."

 

I think you missed an easy one.

 

I'm disappointed that my first interaction here has been a negative.
 

I approached this thread under the assumption that somebody that would post on FDR sought the truth, understanding, precision, etc.

 

 

Passive-aggressive statements like this are WEAK, dsayers. No, you approached this thread with a crowbar of resentment looking for a crack to pry open. I appreciate that this kind of forum mostly attracts people with significant personal issues looking for advice, perspective, and encouragement. I have a lot of empathy for the struggles that people face, but I'm not interested in wallowing with disgruntled middle-aged men and deprecating myself to appease their resentment.

I'm disappointed that my first interaction here has been a negative one.

[dsayers]

I appreciate that this kind of forum mostly attracts people with significant personal issues looking for advice, perspective, and encouragement.

 

If this were true, and you see yourself as untarnished/above this as it appears that you do, you wouldn't have shared here. I don't think you will find lots of people willing to talk with you once they learn that you've judged them before meeting them. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail is what I'm trying to say here.

 

How important is truth to you? And how important is it to you relative to comfort?

[Wiltin]

Still with the loaded questions?

 

I gave you a pleasant way out of this conversation with this post:

Alright, well thanks for the advice. As for my partner's feelings, I don't feel like it is my place to spray them wantonly about on public forums. I don't agree that the only reason her mother is her mother is because her father chose her to be. She would not exist at all had the slightest thing been biochemically different on the night of her conception. Infact, she would not exist at all if a particular blade of grass had grown on the African planes for an antelope to eat, for just enough energy to move within sight of a hunter, for the hunter to kill, for the hunter's child to eat, for the child to survive the winter, for the child to eventually grow up and give birth to one of my partner's ancient ancestors. Your concern for the welfare of my family is noted but this is a public forum and I think I've given a fair overview of my situation for the purposes of our interaction here. I appreciate your interest.

 

 

Then I gave you the reasonable option of just letting it be for the sake of remaining respectful when I said:

 

 

I feel like you resent me dsayers, I sniffed it early on in this conversation. I'm sorry if your history or choices have left you feeling like you've fallen behind in the road to a happy family life of your own. I could reply to your latest accusation but I think it will just lead to another, and another. My life isn't perfect but I'm proud of my decisions and I won't be forced into a blame game or self-attack.

 

Then I explicitly told you that I didn't want to continue this conversation when I said:

 

 

I'll explain why your whole assessment of the situation is wrong and why I'm cutting this conversation off only for the sake of onlookers, I'm not interested in continuing a discussion with you.

 

This is no longer about me dsayers, it's about you. How can I help?

[dsayers]

Some people aren't aware of the amount of effort they put into escaping the truth. Resistance was provided to make it more evident since to be aware is to be accountable. For me, this has been about your child. I'd like for you to benefit as well, but that is secondary. To not even be curious as to the potentiality of harming your child is truly frightening. I thank you for supporting the show and hope your are able to get more out of it, for your child's sake.

[Wiltin]

Wow, you're insufferable.

[corpus mentium]

Peaceful parenting:

 

A survey asking parents if they consider themselves "a peaceful parent" would return a near 100% positive result. "Peaceful parenting" is a vacuous, subjective sound bite. Of course my partner and I are committed to peaceful parenting, what is the alternative? Combative parenting? I deliberately avoided saying we were committed to peaceful parenting because you were obviously referring to a particular parenting methodology put forward by experts, more precisely: a fad parenting model. No we are not committed to a fad parenting model.

 

 

If such a survey returned a near 100% positive result and if we consider that other studies have shown nearly the polar opposite behavior, it might be important in such a survey to look at the definition of peaceful parenting not to mention relying on the accuracy of self-reporting. Have you seen the following video? Please keep in mind that he also talks about coercive parenting techniques other than spanking, i.e. yelling and time-outs.

 

 

Combative parenting doesn't have a very nice ring to it, nor does it leave one feeling superficially warm and fuzzy. I think terms and phrases the vast majority of parents like to use is something like "tough love" or maybe they say to themselves "Spare the rod, spoil the child," or maybe to their children "You should be grateful you get punished as little as you do! What I got was much, much worse!" 

 

Can I ask how you came to the determination that peaceful parenting is a fad? Are there specific points about it that you find lacking after taking the time to learn about it? Do I properly understand you that there is a problem with accepting the conclusions of experts? Would you accept the conclusions of a non-expert? If you have found compelling information against peaceful parenting I think a lot of people here would be interested in perusing it.

[Wiltin]

Thanks for the video, I've seen it before. I have no argument with peaceful parenting. My issue is with my interrogator's method of inquiry, fault seeking, and apparent lack of empathy for my position having disclosed private information on a public forum. He also continued to ask pretentious questions after I made it clear I wasn't going to engage. The word expert is used subjectively and experts rarely agree on all issues. We are not 'committed' to any particular expert view is what I'm saying, and 'peaceful parenting' really is just a vacuous, subjective sound bite, which I find irritating.

 

I think Alfie Kohn's work is helpful.

 

[marius]

Hello Wiltin.

I know you are probably going to take this experience as representative of this community (thats our instinct, thats what saves us from predators), but please try to come back again.

You really have a lot to learn here, thats was true for me at least, and still is very much.

I was disappointed with a lot of interactions here, but also very impressed with others.

 

I hear about not spanking, i think thats admirable, thanks for that. And the way you were very responsible in making the decision is also a good thing.

The point regarding a history of being around mentally ill family members is not a good thing. I would say that therapy would help in that case.

[Wiltin]

Thanks for the encouragement Marius.

 

I reread this thread and realised I brought a lot of prejudice into the conversation. I built a profile of dsayers in my mind based on his age, information in his own introduction post, and unwillingness to discuss his own adult life. So in my mind I was conversing with a middle-aged, under employed, single, isolated man with a chip on his shoulder.

 

This was not fair of me, so for what it is worth I'm sorry for that. It is an unfortunate problem with communicating on a web forum, I should have engaged his posts directly without prejudice. I've learned something valuable here already.

[marius]

I cant say how the guilt is spread, and its true that if you think about yourself(incl how you may have reacted to clear signs of hostility, in different situations.-edited)you have a chance to learn a lot.

But be careful with self-attack. In many cases you are just not at fault.

[dsayers]

how you may have reacted to clear signs of hostility

 

I've looked over the thread once more and only find two sources of hostility. Wiltin has already explained the one, even if he did so with the baseless, demonstrably false accusation of unwillingness to discuss my adult life. And now this even more severe accusation of hostility. I am not a hostile person. Could you explain what it is that you're referring to? Can you explain why you'd make such an accusation in my presence, but not to me? That's hostile. Also, sharing self-knowledge is not the same as self-attack. Your post strikes me as inciting a situation that was already left alone. I'm not saying that's necessarily an accurate description, but that is my experience. It leaves me wondering why a person would do that. Any clarifications you could offer would be appreciated since this undeserved friction is part of the reason why I've stopped visiting the site as often.

[marius]

i didnt delve too deeply into your conversation. i should have made it clear that im not talking about this particular case.

[cynicist]

Welcome to the forums Wiltin. I got the sense that you've come a long way from your first post. I mean being baptized at 19 and dropping out at 20? I can't imagine what you were going through during that period of time. I stopped doing any serious catholicking when I was around 12 or so and only went to church after being reluctantly guilted by my mother for a few more years before I stopped anything to do with religion. (although it was a long while before I became atheist) 

 

You are lucky to have found a person that is positive and committed to raising children without using violence. I also think that you mentioning Alfie Kohn is a good sign that you are on the right path when it comes to parenting. (not that I'm an expert :s)

 

It's unfortunate that this thread took a turn onto a passive-aggressive route but one thing to keep in mind is that we all make mistakes, and even on a forum dedicated to introspection you can have all the same behaviors you see elsewhere on the internet, even if the caliber of person here is higher than the average. The fact that you didn't leave immediately after one unpleasant interaction says a lot to me.

 

Some people aren't aware of the amount of effort they put into escaping the truth. Resistance was provided to make it more evident since to be aware is to be accountable. For me, this has been about your child. I'd like for you to benefit as well, but that is secondary. To not even be curious as to the potentiality of harming your child is truly frightening. I thank you for supporting the show and hope your are able to get more out of it, for your child's sake.

 

Take your lack of political views for example. Any imprecision you do not make an effort to correct is one you will pass onto your child. This is a strike against their chance at success if they're not taught rational thought and moral importance.

 

Oh come on, give him a break. You don't know how long he has been listening for, he has admitted he's not very political and therefore doesn't have a lot of interest in it, and he and his wife have committed to not spanking their child. I mean he even agrees that the public sector is parasitical! That amount of change and improvement is beyond what most people are capable of. Perfection is the enemy of the good, and I think as long as he keeps listening and is open to the arguments he may eventually come to the same conclusions as you, but chastising him for not conforming immediately is not the right way to introduce people to the conversation.

 

Both of you were passive-aggressive here, but you aren't new to the forums. Your responses make it sound like you are debating an evasive troll...

[dsayers]

Both of you were passive-aggressive here, but you aren't new to the forums. Your responses make it sound like you are debating an evasive troll...

 

Thank you for your input. I actually had a longer response typed out talking about how this isn't accurate or constructive, and how that contrasts with prescribing giving somebody a break, which shouldn't apply differently based on tenure on one forum. However, I'm well aware of how easily I get goaded by appeals to insecurity and need to work on this. Suffice it to say that calling something X doesn't make it so and there is a difference between initiating and responding. I've reviewed the thread a couple times now and I responded to attacks with assertiveness and curiosity, not passive-aggressiveness. Even here, where you make an accusation with no substantiation and no effort to actually help, I'm thankful for the opportunity.

 

@marius: Thank you for the clarification.

[cynicist]

Thank you for your input. I actually had a longer response typed out talking about how this isn't accurate or constructive, and how that contrasts with prescribing giving somebody a break, which shouldn't apply differently based on tenure on one forum. However, I'm well aware of how easily I get goaded by appeals to insecurity and need to work on this. Suffice it to say that calling something X doesn't make it so and there is a difference between initiating and responding. I've reviewed the thread a couple times now and I responded to attacks with assertiveness and curiosity, not passive-aggressiveness. Even here, where you make an accusation with no substantiation and no effort to actually help, I'm thankful for the opportunity.

 

I quoted two examples, and there were certainly more than that. You repeatedly implied things about the OP and his ability to be a competent parent, which isn't exactly encouraging or empathetic. I'm not giving you a break because you should know better, being so familiar with philosophy and participating on the boards for so much longer than him. Personally I think it's kind of insulting to have to point out where you are being passive-aggressive, since you're an intelligent fellow, but since you are claiming to only be assertive/curious in this thread I'm going to show you one below.

 

Where I was coming from is that the State is immoral is a fairly easy one. To not have views not fully formed or be willing to dispense with the moral consideration for utility's sake is poor methodology. I'm urging you to sort that one out before your child is old enough to understand that daddy missed an easy one.

 

This is just obviously condescending. The state is immoral is easy to grasp. You haven't grasped it. Better get on that before your kid realizes you failed to do something that is easy and looks down on you for it. 

 

You live a life where you meet all of your goals without initiating the use of force against others, but are uncertain if an absence of coercion is possible in the real world? So just in case, we should have institutionalized, pseudo-legitimate coercion?

 

Did you really accept it immediately? If so that's seriously impressive. It took me a while just to understand the ideas and get passed some of the emotional hurdles I had, so when this guy doesn't just accept anarchy straight away (and given it's popular connotation, that's not unreasonable) it would be more empathetic to realize that it's a very strange idea to the majority of people and goes counter to what they've been told for most of their lives. Keep in mind he never said it was a ridiculous or crazy idea, just that he doesn't quite see how it could work. Rather than imply that he prefers the coercion of others to placate his fears, why not suggest Stefan's book Practical Anarchy? (which goes into detail on some of the more common concerns)

 

Even here, where you make an accusation with no substantiation and no effort to actually help, I'm thankful for the opportunity.

 

You're still doing it.