4 ms·

"Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws!" I'm nearly as far away from libertarian as one can be, but no - it's not the same as not having laws. Examp

"Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws!" I'm nearly as far away from libertarian as one can be, but no - it's not the same as not having laws. Example: Old (American) West-style "frontier justice" where a bunch of townspeople form a posse or a lynch mob or whatever to right some (real or perceived) wrong. (edit: I do understand that this is only one possible scenario, and not what all or even many libertarians want)

brnstz 13y ago
Mob justice is not law. For an illustration of this, check out the very first scene of the TV series Deadwood. There's a lynch mob outside the sheriff's office, and they want to kill the person in the jail. The sheriff fends them off so he can legally hang him instead. The creator originally wanted to do a series on ancient Rome, about the birthplace of civilization. The studio wanted a Western. He said, oh, perfect, that works, too.
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  Perhaps citing a television show is not the most credible evidence one can bring to a discussion? Edit (since I cannot reply directly, apparently): why is it not credible? Can I start citing the X-Files or Star Trek? How about a broadcast of the Nancy Grace show?
  - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
    You really have trouble with this kind of discussion? I'm not sure what would fix this thinking ... Maybe you should read books or learn thought experiments or just start with basic metaphors ... hrrmphh! I'm stumped!
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    To illustrate a concept? Fictional media are ideal, as they can have the facts go however they want. What difference are you hallucinating between citing a philosophical paper discussing a thought experiment, and citing a television show?
  - brnstz 13y ago
    Why is it not credible? That scene illustrates a point even more abstract than the one we are discussing. If the result is the same (the prisoner dies), does it matter whether a legal authority performs the killing, or whether a mob does? I think it does. You may not agree with the legal authority's process or laws, but at the very least it is written down.
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    > (since I cannot reply directly, apparently) HN hides these links to prevent very quick back-and-forth. Either wait a few minutes or click the 'link' link.
    - MrZongle2 13y ago
      Thank you. I wasn't aware of that.
- shpxnvz 13y ago
  And yet mob justice is exactly what we have in US, though sometimes with a legislative session's worth of delay. A constitutional republic protects against mob justice through individual guarantees of property and liberty, and further through strict limitations on the state's power. Our government, of course, has long since managed to rid itself of most of these limitations.
  - brnstz 13y ago
    Laws are not perfect. Sometimes you need a revolution (i.e., a mob).
arg01 13y ago
I'd have to say that the law looks like a monopoly to me. If the only way I can avoid being subject to the local law is to move a large distance and that's the only way to opt out how is this not a monopoly, or rather how is it any less the case than it is now?
mpyne 13y ago
The thing to keep in mind is that the whole idea of a state is that it is the organizational entity (call it a posse if you like) that has the legitimacy to use force in the first place. If multiple such groups have the "right" then you have either a coalition state or tribes with warlords, but even that only really changes the level of jurisdiction. It seems to me that some libertarians try to claim theoretical victory by defining their legal enforcement to be a private contractor or somesuch, but as soon as they do that they've simply re-defined the government to be that private contractor (or whoever is controlling them) instead. There's still a state and still governance, whatever you happen to call that particular rose.
muteh 13y ago
You just said "lynch mob" like it was a good thing. Try again.

brnstz 13y ago

Mob justice is not law. For an illustration of this, check out the very first scene of the TV series Deadwood. There's a lynch mob outside the sheriff's office, and they want to kill the person in the jail. The sheriff fends them off so he can legally hang him instead. The creator originally wanted to do a series on ancient Rome, about the birthplace of civilization. The studio wanted a Western. He said, oh, perfect, that works, too.

MrZongle2 13y ago
Perhaps citing a television show is not the most credible evidence one can bring to a discussion? Edit (since I cannot reply directly, apparently): why is it not credible? Can I start citing the X-Files or Star Trek? How about a broadcast of the Nancy Grace show?
- dinkumthinkum 13y ago
  You really have trouble with this kind of discussion? I'm not sure what would fix this thinking ... Maybe you should read books or learn thought experiments or just start with basic metaphors ... hrrmphh! I'm stumped!
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  To illustrate a concept? Fictional media are ideal, as they can have the facts go however they want. What difference are you hallucinating between citing a philosophical paper discussing a thought experiment, and citing a television show?
- brnstz 13y ago
  Why is it not credible? That scene illustrates a point even more abstract than the one we are discussing. If the result is the same (the prisoner dies), does it matter whether a legal authority performs the killing, or whether a mob does? I think it does. You may not agree with the legal authority's process or laws, but at the very least it is written down.
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  > (since I cannot reply directly, apparently) HN hides these links to prevent very quick back-and-forth. Either wait a few minutes or click the 'link' link.
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    Thank you. I wasn't aware of that.
shpxnvz 13y ago
And yet mob justice is exactly what we have in US, though sometimes with a legislative session's worth of delay. A constitutional republic protects against mob justice through individual guarantees of property and liberty, and further through strict limitations on the state's power. Our government, of course, has long since managed to rid itself of most of these limitations.
- brnstz 13y ago
  Laws are not perfect. Sometimes you need a revolution (i.e., a mob).

arg01 13y ago

I'd have to say that the law looks like a monopoly to me. If the only way I can avoid being subject to the local law is to move a large distance and that's the only way to opt out how is this not a monopoly, or rather how is it any less the case than it is now?

mpyne 13y ago

The thing to keep in mind is that the whole idea of a state is that it is the organizational entity (call it a posse if you like) that has the legitimacy to use force in the first place. If multiple such groups have the "right" then you have either a coalition state or tribes with warlords, but even that only really changes the level of jurisdiction. It seems to me that some libertarians try to claim theoretical victory by defining their legal enforcement to be a private contractor or somesuch, but as soon as they do that they've simply re-defined the government to be that private contractor (or whoever is controlling them) instead. There's still a state and still governance, whatever you happen to call that particular rose.

muteh 13y ago

You just said "lynch mob" like it was a good thing. Try again.