9 ms·

> The right of exit, as they say, is still there. The existence of rights does not obviate the possibility that they will be infringed upon. > There is also f

> The right of exit, as they say, is still there. The existence of rights does not obviate the possibility that they will be infringed upon. > There is also freedom in the security of living in a content and happy society that isn't setting up guillotines because massive underclasses have been pushed to their breaking points. The price you pay for civilization, and so on. So I’d really like these leaders to quit pushing us to the breaking point but they keep doing things that benefit themselves and their cronies and telling me its for my own good. So I’m not really sympathetic to the idea that civilization requires central banks run by oligarchs or tax laws (written for the benefit of oligarchs) that punish productivity and reward sloth.

Apocryphon 6y ago
It does not require endorsement of the current leaders nor their system to recognize the very basic and banal fact that taxation is a valid mechanism that a society uses to sustain itself. This doesn't even require one to be in favor of specific current taxes, it's simply acknowledging that taxation as a principle is not some sort of ludicrously unjust abomination. Taxation predates central banks.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > very basic and banal fact that taxation is a valid mechanism that a society uses to sustain itself. Validity in this case is not a fact it is an opinion or value judgment that implies that it is moral/ethical to use coercion to extract money from citizens. You may agree with this. You may not claim it as a fact. > taxation as a principle is not some sort of ludicrously unjust abomination Thats your opinion and the oligarchs who decide how tax money is spent appreciate your conformity.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    > it is an opinion or value judgment that implies that it is moral/ethical to use coercion to extract money from citizens. Sure, and it is an opinion or value judgment supported by millennia of social contract even before Enlightenment era thinkers came up with the concept of the social contract. If you're going against one of the basic mechanisms or tools for how society works, you might as well label yourself an anarchist. Which is fine, plenty of mutualist ideologies exist, but you should at least identify yourself so people will understand the very different ideological framework you're arguing from. > Thats your opinion and the oligarchs who decide how tax money is spent appreciate your conformity. And the puritans who dictate popular morality appreciate your conformity in wearing clothing. Again, people can oppose oppressive taxes and unjust tax systems, but to argue that taxes are unnecessary is seemingly arguing against all of human society since the development of agriculture. Unless you are a believer in Modern Monetary Theory? Good of you to realize the possibilities of fiat currency.
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      > Sure, and it is an opinion or value judgment supported by millennia of social contract even before Enlightenment era thinkers came up with the concept of the social contract. Yeah, so is slavery. So is monarchism. So is marital rape. > If you're going against one of the basic mechanisms or tools for how society works, you might as well label yourself an anarchist. Which is fine, plenty of mutualist ideologies exist, but you should at least identify yourself so people will understand the very different ideological framework you're arguing from. I’ll identify myself as an anarchist for being opposed to violent coercion of resources if you will identify yourself as a criminal for being in support. Sound fair? > And the puritans who dictate popular morality appreciate your conformity in wearing clothing. Norms of wearing clothing are not dictated by puritans but arise and are maintained by repeated intentional participation. > Again, people can oppose oppressive taxes and unjust tax systems, We do. In fact we invite you to explain how any tax is just. > but to argue that taxes are unnecessary is seemingly arguing against all of human society since the development of agriculture. Not at all, one may as well say that arguing that slavery is immoral is arguing against all of human society since agriculture.
      - Apocryphon 6y ago
        > Yeah, so is slavery. So is monarchism. So is marital rape. So is property. So is language. So is symbolic thought. > I’ll identify myself as an anarchist for being opposed to violent coercion of resources if you will identify yourself as a criminal for being in support. Sound fair? Anarchism is an existing ideology with many school of thoughts within it. You seem to be an anarcho-capitalist, to be precise. I, of course proudly admit to being a criminal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXTt9OmJis&t=1m18s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXTt9OmJis&t=1m18s) insofar living in modern society makes criminals of us all, yourself included, even under duress. > Norms of wearing clothing are not dictated by puritans but arise and are maintained by repeated intentional participation. As is tax law. > In fact we invite you to explain how any tax is just. Because it's cheaper to provide social programs than to deal with rolling peasant revolts. > Not at all, one may as well say that arguing that slavery is immoral is arguing against all of human society since agriculture. And indeed so. So are you then an anarcho-primitivist? Or anti-propertarian?

Apocryphon 6y ago

It does not require endorsement of the current leaders nor their system to recognize the very basic and banal fact that taxation is a valid mechanism that a society uses to sustain itself. This doesn't even require one to be in favor of specific current taxes, it's simply acknowledging that taxation as a principle is not some sort of ludicrously unjust abomination. Taxation predates central banks.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> very basic and banal fact that taxation is a valid mechanism that a society uses to sustain itself. Validity in this case is not a fact it is an opinion or value judgment that implies that it is moral/ethical to use coercion to extract money from citizens. You may agree with this. You may not claim it as a fact. > taxation as a principle is not some sort of ludicrously unjust abomination Thats your opinion and the oligarchs who decide how tax money is spent appreciate your conformity.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  > it is an opinion or value judgment that implies that it is moral/ethical to use coercion to extract money from citizens. Sure, and it is an opinion or value judgment supported by millennia of social contract even before Enlightenment era thinkers came up with the concept of the social contract. If you're going against one of the basic mechanisms or tools for how society works, you might as well label yourself an anarchist. Which is fine, plenty of mutualist ideologies exist, but you should at least identify yourself so people will understand the very different ideological framework you're arguing from. > Thats your opinion and the oligarchs who decide how tax money is spent appreciate your conformity. And the puritans who dictate popular morality appreciate your conformity in wearing clothing. Again, people can oppose oppressive taxes and unjust tax systems, but to argue that taxes are unnecessary is seemingly arguing against all of human society since the development of agriculture. Unless you are a believer in Modern Monetary Theory? Good of you to realize the possibilities of fiat currency.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    > Sure, and it is an opinion or value judgment supported by millennia of social contract even before Enlightenment era thinkers came up with the concept of the social contract. Yeah, so is slavery. So is monarchism. So is marital rape. > If you're going against one of the basic mechanisms or tools for how society works, you might as well label yourself an anarchist. Which is fine, plenty of mutualist ideologies exist, but you should at least identify yourself so people will understand the very different ideological framework you're arguing from. I’ll identify myself as an anarchist for being opposed to violent coercion of resources if you will identify yourself as a criminal for being in support. Sound fair? > And the puritans who dictate popular morality appreciate your conformity in wearing clothing. Norms of wearing clothing are not dictated by puritans but arise and are maintained by repeated intentional participation. > Again, people can oppose oppressive taxes and unjust tax systems, We do. In fact we invite you to explain how any tax is just. > but to argue that taxes are unnecessary is seemingly arguing against all of human society since the development of agriculture. Not at all, one may as well say that arguing that slavery is immoral is arguing against all of human society since agriculture.
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      > Yeah, so is slavery. So is monarchism. So is marital rape. So is property. So is language. So is symbolic thought. > I’ll identify myself as an anarchist for being opposed to violent coercion of resources if you will identify yourself as a criminal for being in support. Sound fair? Anarchism is an existing ideology with many school of thoughts within it. You seem to be an anarcho-capitalist, to be precise. I, of course proudly admit to being a criminal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXTt9OmJis&t=1m18s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXTt9OmJis&t=1m18s) insofar living in modern society makes criminals of us all, yourself included, even under duress. > Norms of wearing clothing are not dictated by puritans but arise and are maintained by repeated intentional participation. As is tax law. > In fact we invite you to explain how any tax is just. Because it's cheaper to provide social programs than to deal with rolling peasant revolts. > Not at all, one may as well say that arguing that slavery is immoral is arguing against all of human society since agriculture. And indeed so. So are you then an anarcho-primitivist? Or anti-propertarian?