6 ms·

If DPR actually paid to have someone killed, it would surprise everyone who knew anything about him. He's thought to be a libertarian and totally against the us

by b6 13y ago

If DPR actually paid to have someone killed, it would surprise everyone who knew anything about him. He's thought to be a libertarian and totally against the use of force.

mikeyouse 13y ago
That hypocrisy grabbed me too. The complaint, when talking about his background makes special note of this; After going to Penn St for a grad degree in materials science, "Ulbrecht states that his 'goals' subsequently 'shifted'. Ulbricht elaborates, obliquely, that he has since focused on "creating an "economic simulation" designed to "give people a first-hand experience of what it would be like to live in a world without the systemic use of force" by "institutions and governments."
- kaonashi 13y ago
  Seems like he found out exactly what would happen; the use of force would be wielded more readily by private actors instead.
  - BrianEatWorld 13y ago
    What do you mean by "more readily"?
    - kaonashi 13y ago
      The monopoly on the use of force by Government agents keeps private actors (or at least it attempts to) from employing violence on their own terms. Absent that monopoly, private agents will fill the void.
      - ahallock 13y ago
        You wouldn't be able to build up the necessary military force without expending massive amounts of money and drawing negative attention to yourself. Investors would not want to be involved with a company creating a PR nightmare and wasting their money on evil. Customers would boycott, the company's stock price would drop, and they wouldn't be able to carry out their plans anyway.
        wiml 13y ago
        This is a happy supposition, but I don't think it's borne out by historical evidence.
        meemoo 13y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_County,_USA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_County,_USA
        JoachimSchipper 13y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#Military_expansion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#Military_exp...
- b6 13y ago
  You seem to be assuming that the allegations are true. The understanding that most people have had is that DPR is a pure freedom fighter. If you take away those allegations, all that's left are fake "crimes" that aren't really crimes at all, just things that government doesn't like. Edit: but I'm waiting and reading with an open mind.
  - teebs 13y ago
    I think it's reasonable to believe that he started out a pure (ish) freedom fighter and got corrupted by the fact that he had made 10's of millions of dollars off his little experiment.
  - tedunangst 13y ago
    Where did the understanding that DPR is a pure freedom fighter come from? DPR?
    - meepmorp 13y ago
      PR and wishful thinking.
Technophobe 13y ago
Why did you include in the fact that he's a libertarian? Libertarians are not against the use of force (unless it's through the state).
- _delirium 13y ago
  A lot of libertarian writing on force starts from a more general "non-aggression principle", and derives the wrongness of state violence as just one special case.
  - praxeologist 13y ago
    I'm not sure this proposed hit was unjustified. Threatening to do something which would end up with 1000's of people caged for years seems like a valid reason to respond with force.
    - darkarmani 13y ago
      Doesn't that reasoning also justify a reverse-hit because DPR is threatening to do something that would result in killing someone which is far worse?
      - praxeologist 13y ago
        I think it is an arbitrary comparison. Possibly 10,000+ years in jail and who knows how many shankings vs maybe 50 of no existence for one person. You are right that, in a basic scenario, killing is a disproportionate response to a lesser crime, but this is an active threat versus a past event and who knows what jail would bring for these hundreds of people who could be convicted. I'm not sure of the details of this situation but just following libertarian legal reasoning there may be another way to justify it. The logically consistent libertarian position on abortion is neither pro-choice nor pro-life. Block's theory of evictionism is basically that a mother's right to remove a fetus is stronger than the fetus' right to be in the womb, yet the mother is not permitted to kill the fetus straight off exactly. If there was developed some technology such as a pig fetus used to carry the child to term then that technology would have to be employed. Would there be some other reliably effective means to stop this snitch besides killing him?
teebs 13y ago
I'd guess that he might be willing to kill people in the case that there are threats to his personal security. He also had aspirations for his site to bring about a libertarian revolution and may have thought that threats to the integrity of the site were worth killing for.
baby 13y ago
He still made the armory.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
orblivion 13y ago
Yeah well us libertarians are as prone as anybody to start rationalizing. Wouldn't surprise me.
CamperBob2 13y ago
Typically, libertarians argue against the initiation of force. Someone who commits extortion against you has arguably thrown the first punch.
clavalle 13y ago
Perhaps he is only opposed to a monopoly on the use of force. Violence for pay is just part of the market dynamic, right?

by b6 13y ago

If DPR actually paid to have someone killed, it would surprise everyone who knew anything about him. He's thought to be a libertarian and totally against the use of force.

mikeyouse 13y ago

That hypocrisy grabbed me too. The complaint, when talking about his background makes special note of this; After going to Penn St for a grad degree in materials science, "Ulbrecht states that his 'goals' subsequently 'shifted'. Ulbricht elaborates, obliquely, that he has since focused on "creating an "economic simulation" designed to "give people a first-hand experience of what it would be like to live in a world without the systemic use of force" by "institutions and governments."

kaonashi 13y ago
Seems like he found out exactly what would happen; the use of force would be wielded more readily by private actors instead.
- BrianEatWorld 13y ago
  What do you mean by "more readily"?
  - kaonashi 13y ago
    The monopoly on the use of force by Government agents keeps private actors (or at least it attempts to) from employing violence on their own terms. Absent that monopoly, private agents will fill the void.
    - ahallock 13y ago
      You wouldn't be able to build up the necessary military force without expending massive amounts of money and drawing negative attention to yourself. Investors would not want to be involved with a company creating a PR nightmare and wasting their money on evil. Customers would boycott, the company's stock price would drop, and they wouldn't be able to carry out their plans anyway.
      - wiml 13y ago
        This is a happy supposition, but I don't think it's borne out by historical evidence.
      - meemoo 13y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_County,_USA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_County,_USA
      - JoachimSchipper 13y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#Military_expansion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#Military_exp...
b6 13y ago
You seem to be assuming that the allegations are true. The understanding that most people have had is that DPR is a pure freedom fighter. If you take away those allegations, all that's left are fake "crimes" that aren't really crimes at all, just things that government doesn't like. Edit: but I'm waiting and reading with an open mind.
- teebs 13y ago
  I think it's reasonable to believe that he started out a pure (ish) freedom fighter and got corrupted by the fact that he had made 10's of millions of dollars off his little experiment.
- tedunangst 13y ago
  Where did the understanding that DPR is a pure freedom fighter come from? DPR?
  - meepmorp 13y ago
    PR and wishful thinking.

Technophobe 13y ago

Why did you include in the fact that he's a libertarian? Libertarians are not against the use of force (unless it's through the state).

_delirium 13y ago
A lot of libertarian writing on force starts from a more general "non-aggression principle", and derives the wrongness of state violence as just one special case.
- praxeologist 13y ago
  I'm not sure this proposed hit was unjustified. Threatening to do something which would end up with 1000's of people caged for years seems like a valid reason to respond with force.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    Doesn't that reasoning also justify a reverse-hit because DPR is threatening to do something that would result in killing someone which is far worse?
    - praxeologist 13y ago
      I think it is an arbitrary comparison. Possibly 10,000+ years in jail and who knows how many shankings vs maybe 50 of no existence for one person. You are right that, in a basic scenario, killing is a disproportionate response to a lesser crime, but this is an active threat versus a past event and who knows what jail would bring for these hundreds of people who could be convicted. I'm not sure of the details of this situation but just following libertarian legal reasoning there may be another way to justify it. The logically consistent libertarian position on abortion is neither pro-choice nor pro-life. Block's theory of evictionism is basically that a mother's right to remove a fetus is stronger than the fetus' right to be in the womb, yet the mother is not permitted to kill the fetus straight off exactly. If there was developed some technology such as a pig fetus used to carry the child to term then that technology would have to be employed. Would there be some other reliably effective means to stop this snitch besides killing him?

teebs 13y ago

I'd guess that he might be willing to kill people in the case that there are threats to his personal security. He also had aspirations for his site to bring about a libertarian revolution and may have thought that threats to the integrity of the site were worth killing for.

baby 13y ago

He still made the armory.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

orblivion 13y ago

Yeah well us libertarians are as prone as anybody to start rationalizing. Wouldn't surprise me.

CamperBob2 13y ago

Typically, libertarians argue against the initiation of force. Someone who commits extortion against you has arguably thrown the first punch.

clavalle 13y ago

Perhaps he is only opposed to a monopoly on the use of force. Violence for pay is just part of the market dynamic, right?