77 votes

An Anarchist's Frustration

You believe that war is just when an American flag is present on the battlefield. I do not.

You say that taxation is the price we pay for civilization. I disagree.

You claim that men with guns and badges have a higher claim on my life and property because they were elected, or appointed, to a position of power. I am offended.

You think that an organization who has the final say in any disagreement, even involving itself; a monopoly on aggressive force; the sole power to declare legal tender; and the ability to fund itself through involuntary means isn't going to abuse this power? I know better.

Yet somehow, I am the idealist?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know many liberty lovers are not anarchists, as I am, but surely you understand my frustration when someone claims, "Oh, you're just being idealistic."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Can I opt out of your monopoly, FreedomReigns?

You can have all the government you want. You can have authoritarianism or totalitarianism or fascism or communism. I would just like a dozen acres of territory without your rules. Is that okay? You can even send me to a different continent. Just as long as its within the 45 degrees of the equator. Please, oh please of master chief? P-l-e-a-s-e. I do not believe in aggression personally nor collectively. So the US gov., in which I am forced to pay for, is against my religion, if you will. My moral worldview does not encompass aggression against others. I do not want to pay for it. So, can I just opt out?

If not, freedom doesn't reign. And you should find a new username.

Do you not have a right to use violence to defend yourself?

"You can have authoritarianism or totalitarianism or fascism or communism."

Anarchists are liars and frauds

Do you NOT have a right to use violence to defend yourself? What's wrong? Guilty conscience? You can use violence to defend yourself. This isn't a monopoly of violence, but YOU do want a free market of violence with no justice.

You want to hire goon squads that will then be free to use violence against those you have no association with or justifiable reason to use violence against.

Are you worried about that jury and system of justice? Are you worried that you'll stand in front of a jury of your peers and answer for your crimes and trying to destroy my government Anarchist? I would be VERY worried if I was an Anarchist, because even I as a Libertarian would send Anarchists to the gallows as enemies of my country.

You're more than welcome to opt out Anarchist. Go live in a tree for all I care, and come down when you remember that you're a man, not a monkey.

You missed the point.

Have your system. Have your government. You are very aggressive. Why force every man, women, and child to live in your imaginary aggressive power structure? I am a free individual. I did not sign up for your imaginary system of forceful authority. Your entire system is immoral in my view. Why do you want to force me to participate? There is not one square inch of the earth that you busybodies do not want control of. You should rename yourself 'IamTyrannyReigning'. With folks like you around, who needs a tyrannical dictator? You are one.

Can I opt out in a tree?
I would do it to be free.
Can I opt out in a car?
Not afraid of feathers and tar.
Can I opt out in my house?
I'll be as quite as a mouse.
Can I opt out over here?
Can I opt out over there?
Can I opt out any ol' where?
Can I opt out of your wars?
Paying for them, of course.
Can I just have a couple acres?
Yes? No? Do I have any takers?
I would just like to be free,
To eat, work, to play and pee.
So I can live my life morally.
Oh how I long to be free.

Ignorance...

Anarcho-capitalism does not mean no government. It means that each individual picks which government they want. Maybe pick and choose which parts of many governments they want or if they want to make their own rules. You have no understanding of what anarcho-capitalists WANT. If you want to attack the feasibility, fine, but at least be intellectually honest.

I know EXACTLY what

I know EXACTLY what Anarcho-Gibberish is all about. You want to call a free market of violence, warlords, and gangland extortion "government"; where we vote with our wallets and the free market decides which warlord wins.

Your wallet is very very small Anarchist, and the warlord who dominates you though force will have no problem buying more than you. In fact, it's guys like you who end up working for them, bowing and groveling at your new masters feet, hoping he raises you up above the other groveling cowards who he controls through violence and prestige, by taking liberty, through extortion, injustice, slavery and serving mans covetous nature.

Wow!!

You really live in quite a fearfilled world don't you. I'd like to see your evidence that all of these thugs, gangs and warlords would spring over night up in your distopian view of anarchy.

I would suggest to you that hippie communes though functionally different than an ancap society were predominantly peaceful for as long as they lasted because people were free to enter and leave as they chose.

Why can't you understand that people who choose to be violent are going to be violent whether there is government or not. The difference between the state and an ancap society is that I will have much more CHOICE for my defense against crime as well as more CHOICE for obtaining justice.

You're not thinking outside the box, when you believe that only government can provide these functions.

It IS possible to believe in PRIVATE defense and PRIVATE roads just as I know you could believe in PRIVATE schools and PRIVATE health care.

The simplest exercise you can do is to simply replace the word government with the words free market.

________________________________________

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

Anarcho-Capitalists are libertarians too

To those of who are relatively new to libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism is one of the major groups in the libertarian coalition. There are also miniarchists, left libertarians, right libertarians, and other smaller groups. I thought I should say something because most of the newer libertarians only seem to be aware of the right libertarians, also called conservative libertarians.

Also, while the vast majority of pure voluntaryists are anarchists, it's possible to be a minarchist and be a pure voluntaryist. Anarchists would argue that such a government would either not work and would collapse on itself or not work and become monopolistic and forceful again, but even if they are correct, the ideology is still possible.

An anarchist is always going to be frustrated

because he believes in and hopes for an idealistic fantasy that can never actually exist in reality :D

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

The Idealistic fantasy is "Limited Government"

That's what was set up. Look where we are at now. In anarchist world, some things will maybe be ideal, others not. What you won't have is people or groups of people running around claiming that they can provide the most ideal central planning.

Anarchist world is now

There is no non-anarchist world. That's what's so funny.

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

Anarchists aren't "limited government".

They aren't "limited government". Anarchists are NO GOVERNMENT. They are ANTI-GOVERNMENT, and want to paint all Libertarians as Anti-Government. They want to use people to destroy. They want to DESTROY MY CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

They call advocates of limited Government STATISTS and say we worship government. They mock Patriots, and stand next to Libertarians screaming "I'm an enemy of the state".

Anarchists, are not limited government. They are Judas Goats and liars, two faced phonies who hope to create a WARLORD GOVERNMENT, a free market of violence serving their self interest.

No kidding

If you progressed past your public education, you would realize that I wasn't claiming anarchists were "Limited government". I simply stated that the idea of "limited government" is the idealistic fantasy.

Republic

They want to DESTROY MY CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC

Not true. You can keep your constitutional republic, as long as it only applies to you and as long as your rulers rule over ONLY you and others who consent.

You aren't alone in the world "sovereign man".

You aren't alone in the world, and you aren't going to take advantage of those who provide the safe haven you intend to live in while you run your foul mouth refusing to pay your fair share, saying you're a sovereign ruler. You don't know what threatens your sovereignty, and that which does is kept at bay by those who pay your way through the world.

Go live in the jungle and tell everybody about how you're a sovereign man, and they need to respect your sovereign status. Tell them about the NAP which says they can't use violence against you. You live under an umbrella where you can play pretend calling yourself a sovereign.

"Freedom, liberty, and their common defense." - You're going to have to care about somebody elses liberty someday, or else you are NEVER going to have your own. Collective force will trump your sovereign delusions. You're going to need help, and you're going to have to figure out how to overcome the covetous horde in a debate on how to use collective force. Will it serve liberty, or will it serve mans covetous nature.

security providers

...and you aren't going to take advantage of those who provide the safe haven you intend to live in while you run your foul mouth refusing to pay your fair share...

An expropriating property protector is a contradiction in terms.

Tests

"You believe that war is just when an American flag is present on the battlefield. I do not."

I was, and am, anarchistic in thinking and in actions, but call me a name that does not fit me, and I'll defend myself against such attacks.

There are now flags on the battlefield between free people and those who effectively enslave free people. Flags that have yellow (gold?) frills around the boarder of those flags are present in many (if not all) "government" buildings.

"You believe that war is just when an American flag is present on the battlefield. I do not."

If someone believes "that war" is this or that, then that person can confess, defend their viewpoint, or merely employ their viewpoint as they see fit. I think the sentence can be understood from a reasonable point of view, but my response to the sentence intends to clarify the actual reality that exists right here in America.

Flags are present. It is war. The criminals have taken over government, and those criminals mark their territory with those yellow frills. It may be a good idea to understand the reality we find ourselves in sooner rather than too late.

"You say that taxation is the price we pay for civilization. I disagree."

The War that is being waged effectively by the criminals who have taken over government use words like TAX to mean only one thing, not two things, and their version of the ONLY meaning of the word is a synonym for CRIME.

TAX = CRIME

Who says so?

I don't.

Tax can be strictly voluntary, and it is that competitive meaning of the word that is the opposite meaning when comparing that meaning with the official lies that are invented by, produced by, and maintained by those criminals who have taken over government.

"You say that taxation is the price we pay for civilization. I disagree."

I say no such thing. A tax can be strictly voluntary and everyone is taxed in one way or another, we are all taxed whenever the things we intend to do are not the things we want to do, but the things we must do, even when those things are taxing us, as work is chosen over play, because food does not fall into our mouths. Work is taxing.

If the sentence intends to point out how CRIME is destructive, and not necessary, then I can agree with the sentence, otherwise the sentence, in my opinion, borrows from, or parrots, the official lies invented by the criminals who have taken over government, as they claim that a TAX is "necessary without question" and what they mean to do is to take what they want from the targets they find that have anything worth taking, which is called CRIME if English means anything.

"You claim that men with guns and badges have a higher claim on my life and property because they were elected, or appointed, to a position of power. I am offended."

I don't know who makes such claims, and if they do they can defend such claims, but the criminals who have taken over government do so by way of deceit, threats of violence, and violence, and so that is CRIME, by any other name it is still CRIME, even if they say it is not CRIME if they do it.

I may also be offended, but I am being warned, as the criminals let me know that they are criminals, and therefore I know what they intend to do: perpetrate crime. They say they have authority, they don't, they have deceit, they have threats of violence, and they have violence. They have those powers that are criminal powers as those powers they have, are powers they use on their innocent targets who happen to be the people who actually make things worth stealing.

"You think that an organization who has the final say in any disagreement, even involving itself; a monopoly on aggressive force; the sole power to declare legal tender; and the ability to fund itself through involuntary means isn't going to abuse this power? I know better."

Someone who thinks that organizations can say something are either deceived or are diverting attention willfully away from the actual people who are saying things. A monopoly on CRIME aught to be called CRIME since calling CRIME anything other than CRIME helps the criminals cover up their CRIME neatly - no thanks - I'll call it CRIME when it is measurably CRIME: beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do criminals abuse POWER? Is that a trick question?

Do legal criminals abuse POWER? Same question, and it is only "tricky" when criminals take over government.

"I know better."

I'm not so sure.

"Yet somehow, I am the idealist?"

I don't think so, I just think you are working toward solutions to the CRIME problem, and finding trouble along the way.

Joe

A Minarchist's Frustration

*insert melodramatic rant*

ChristianAnarchist's picture

Why the attacks?

Don't know why so many want to "attack" someone who believes in the peaceful philosophy of "anarchism". Any "statist" is promoting the "violence" of the "state" against any free thinking person who takes a position opposed to the "state". Are you a "statist"? You are if you believe that you can assemble a group of armed people and FORCE your laws on other people who disagree with you.

Anarchism will NOT result in chaos as most people will not wish to engage in random acts of violence and those who do will eventually find a person who will stop them. Don't need a "state" to do any "enforcement" (notice the word "force" in there?)

Beware the cult of "government"...

LOL, why the attacks? Have

LOL, why the attacks? Have you seen all my downvoted posts that were not attacks at all, except at the anarchist ideology?

Ventura 2012

That's how an Anarchist defends their ideology, with down votes.

They were having a heart attack the other day when they couldn't hit that down vote.

Just swatting an annoying buzzing insect

Just swatting an annoying buzzing insect, that is what a down vote is.

because you wanna create a self serving free market of violence

Because you are a naive two faced liar who wants to create a self serving free market of violence, and the free market does not keep the peace, or serve justice. The free market serves VALUE. People want to get the most value they can for their money, and there is no better way to get value through violence than slavery.

So that's what you'll create, a free market without justice filled with slaves and the products of slave labor, until it blows up in your face and you get enslaved by the warlord who can pay for the biggest goon squad.

Tell me straight Anarchist, do you think you serve the winning warlord, or do you just want to be able buy slaves without the fear of facing justice?

I'd just like to comment that

I'd just like to comment that abolishing slavery was at one time considered "idealist."

When someone slaps the title "idealist" on you, they are really saying, "I do not understand you fully, and what you say challenges my preconceived notions. Your differing ideas threaten me, so I will refuse to consider what you say and I will now bury my head in the sands of an antiquated 200+ year old document."

The founding fathers were idealists too

They were in the minority in the beginning as well. But a voluntaryist doesn't care if he has a majority opinion or not because he is not looking to force his views on any one. He simply, like a homesteader or an explorer, or today maybe a seasteader, wishes to be left alone, perhaps with a few other close like minded friends to be truly free.

How is that chaotic and violent?

________________________________________

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine

Yep

The definition of anarchy: when the former government employees riot in the streets... (thanks to L. A. Rollins)

"To the morally inverted, war appears as a quick, clear path to the top." -- Preston Parker
firelightermedia@gmail.com

That is chaos and violence,

That is chaos and violence, not anarchy.
Don't believe the hype.

herp

Yep.

Agreed. I can't help noticing that the Anarchists all sound like establishment Democrats and Republicans running their mouths trying create riots as a cover for their own crimes.

There will be justice, and there's no rat hole deep enough or riot big enough for them to hide in.

Anarchy isn't idealist. It's

Anarchy isn't idealist. It's very realistic. It is the natural state of the world, it is what we have now and what we will always have.

What I don't get is why people who label themselves 'anarchists' don't realize that's exactly how things are NOW. There is no rule of law and if there was it would be by action of the majority. There are only criminal organizations who have chosen to implement a monopoly on violence.

On the other hand if you envision a world where no organization lays claim to land or tries to control other peoples' lives, well yes that is obviously idealist and impossible.

Since there will always be someone out there who wants power the best we can hope for is to take over the largest criminal organization and rule by liberty instead of empire.

Do not confuse liberty with absolute freedom. Liberty is the rejection of the initiation of violence. Nothing more.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Take over the largest criminal organization in the world,

and rule by liberty?

Well, that is a testable theory. We could start by taking over the LA Bloods, and 'ruling' the streets with charity.