24 votes

I am an advocate of a stateless society... Anyone want to debate? I would love to improve my arguments.

I just saw a thread that prompted me to offer a place to go to debate this topic.

Feel free to join in.

A little bit of background. I spent over a decade as a Libertarian/Constitutionalist. Recently I have been reading a lot of information about a voluntary government.

I realized that the Mad Max zombie apocalypse picture I had in my head about a voluntary society was indoctrination and so began reading even more.

Here are a few points to get things rolling.

1. It helped me to think of a stateless society as a voluntary government/s society. Removing the word anarchy changed my feelings and allowed me to think more clearly about the topic and beat indoctrination I did not even know I had.

2. I believe the phrase voluntary government/s is an accurate description of how we would choose to organize ourselves. Clearly we enjoy some services offered by government. A)Defense from foreign enemies B) Defense from domestic enemies. C)Court/Arbitration system, etc. If the vast majority of people (I would think over 99%) want these services, then several entrepreneurs will offer them. Effectively becoming a voluntary government as we know it. With the principle in place that they must earn our business with superior products or services, and not steal at will, a better product at a cheaper cost is likely.

3.The burden of proof in this debate: If you do not agree with a stateless society, then what you are saying is, "I am willing to send men with guns to your home and take your property to give myself these services because I think society will be unlivable without this force" I would argue that in order to initiate force, the burden proof is on you to explain why the world will go to hell without our wonderful government. AS a reminder, when it was suggested that slavery be abolished on moral grounds, there were plenty who said, "Society will collapse", "the economy will collapse", "Who will pick the cotton?" fortunately the world decided that this fear mongering was not a valid justification for being immoral and making slaves of free men.

Plenty more to say of course, but I don't want to write an essay. :) What are your thoughts? Any voluntarists here?

Comment viewing options

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

So who is supposed to stop

So who is supposed to stop these domestic enemies? Life is spent working just to scrape by, so how would anyone have time to engage some inner enemy from rising? This country operated just fine when all we had was 10 amendments and everyone held the public servants accountable. It's not even that people got lazy, it's that they had no reason to even see a plot to transform our country into crap, and people mostly still don't. Everyone just finds our "rulers" incompetent rather than stooges.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.


Until we figure out how to stop mob rule, I can not see any possibility of a long term reduction in tyranny.

Gene Louis
Supporting a Needed Tool for Government Feedback:
A Citizen-Operated Legal System.

We had a system to stop mob

We had a system to stop mob rule, but over a century ago a plotting few crept in and rammed through legislation for a central bank and income taxes. They need to be recognized, and the longer people deny it and poke fun at so-called conspiracy theorists, the worse things will get and will be harder to reverse. For me it all just comes down to evil, and personally I see an entity like satan behind it. Even if you don't believe in that, evil exists and must be killed.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

the problem is government makes theft highly profitable.

Where the incentive is high enough, corruption grows. The mechanism and principle of government theft by force was granted by the establishment of government. Albeit a small and limited one. That freedom created a staggering amount of wealth for this nation. That wealth became the massive incentive to spend trillions, taking over media, political parties, corporations and everything else via corruption and force.

The voluntarist argues that as amazing for its time as the constitution was, it must be noted that it was not perfect. It didn't last forever. Some may say, that the principle that caused the death of the nation was contained in the original constitution because the mechanism to point guns at people and take their money was granted.


Protect your assets and profit from the greatest wealth transfer in history.

People had a choice, and they

People had a choice, and they let a plotting evil in. It's as simple as that. The constitution didn't allow it, the 'elite' changed it to suit their needs. They got their guys in, and changed things slowly over time. I think we should return to it but make it unamendable.

I also don't think states should have powers that the federal government doesn't have:

Why should the federal level have no say in who can marry, but the power should be in the states? They should have no say in it as well, and it should not be something that's licensed.

Alcohol, drugs, tobacco...everything should be legal and states shouldn't even regulate it. If you are a slimy businessman and sell that shit to kids, people should burn down your store.

If a business wants to discriminate with hiring or by who they allow in their establishment, they should be allowed to. I believe that people should have the right to segregate their private business. A person's business should have no fewer rights than they do in their home. Smoking inside can be lumped in here.

The only power states should have is by their people, and the only recognizable right they should have as a state is to not be a part of this union.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

Sounds like feudalism: an endless series of legal contracts

Any effort to create a modern stateless society would end up looking like feudalism: an endless series of legal contracts between parties. This would make lawyers even more powerful than they are now with a developed code of law backed by the state.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

You have an endless series of laws to abide by now....

Laws are good. I like laws. The freer market has already created a far superior and more efficient system of contact law.


Protect your assets and profit from the greatest wealth transfer in history.

The best government / dictatorship is None

I opt out of all dictatorships. All governments are dictatorships.


I'll debate if I can be on your team.

It is over simplified and flippant, but my favorite argument for those who insist we MUST be governed... OK, I'll be your queen. I am really only interested in governing me, but if you REALLY insist on being governed by someone else, at least I'm a nice person. You don't want me to be your queen? That is how I feel about everyone else.
Familiar with the term "agorism?" It is the first "ism" I've seen in a long time that does not give me the heeby-jeebies.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

I believe the banksters

are preparing for a stateless society since they are hiring the world's largest mercenaries for protection.

I see it as a no win state or no state the little guy gets screwed.

Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.

If they are preparing for a

If they are preparing for a Stateless society, then they must not think there will be a collapse. If there is a collapse, then most of them will be much poorer than they are right now. The vast majority of their "wealth" is in paper assets; these will have a value of zero if a collapse happens. Only real assets will retain value. The Bankers can't just cash-out either lest they want to actually trigger a spotaneous collapse which will net them less preserved wealth.

At last your not paying for your own enslavement with stateless.

More money for your defense, less money for your attackers, makes a big difference.

Protect your assets and profit from the greatest wealth transfer in history.

I am inclined to believe what you say--


it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Lets Argue on this thread over here... ok?

Go Here ... http://www.dailypaul.com/275979/biggest-challenge-to-anarchy...

There, for all my fellow anarcho-capitalists to read and discuss, I put forth perhaps the best book (yet) that challenges Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalism. And I must say, its a great read, wonderfully written, and we anarcho-capitalists should be fully aware of its factual arguments and reasoning.

Most of all, we need to respond back, not with any "Foaming-at-the-Mouth" righteous moral-ism, but rather with an intelligent Libertarian 3.0 type rational reply.

Finally, I have no idea why its so down voted, but whenever someone claims to have found a new "IS", as in this is a fact in reality, it begs investigation & verification. To argue that it OUGHT not be that way, is really not an argument, but rather a sentiment or preference or a desired end goal. Most of all, perhaps there is MORE to the data and Pinkers CIVILIZATION PROCESS explanation is incomplete.

In Pinkers case, the challenge to anarcho-capitalism is that the great leviathan coupled with the free market underneath, from his review of the data and Human Nature, shows a "CIVILIZING PROCESS" is at work, making the rate of violence that is found in stateless anarchies, plunge to all time historical lows when the Leviathan enters the picture. Moreover, he says thanks to this CIVILIZATION PROCESS, we now have unprecedented low rates of violence for the human species.

I invite all my fellow anarcho-capitalists to read the book so we can all reply wisely.


Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

I'm reading what you have to say--

I'm amazed nobody has come on here and called *you* an anarchist. Yesterday on another discussion someone suggested that anarchists are 'cancers'--

and need to be removed.

I believe in law (God's law), but I do believe that people with high moral judgement and strong principles of personality responsibility and accountability can govern themselves.

For now--

I'm afraid at least a minority need governing.

But I'm open-minded enough to talk about it. Oh, by the way, I was called an anarchist yesterday in a discussion, too.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

I think it was your article, that made me start this thread.

I think it was your article, that made me start this thread.

Protect your assets and profit from the greatest wealth transfer in history.

which article was that?

The one on Atomic City Girls (the women who built the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki)?

I did a post on that two days ago, but nobody read it. LOL!

I'm not sure which article you mean. I am here to learn (on DP and on earth)--

and I'm open-minded. I do believe, however, in evil and good--

not just in . . . 'what feels good and what doesn't'.

And I don't like generalizing (collectivizing; I've had some people on DP get upset with me about using that word lately, too) and labeling--

and being ready to shoot anyone who doesn't agree with me.

I think it's important to learn. And I might make some mistaken assumptions now and again--

but I haven't been brainwashed by the MSM. I haven't watched television since about 1969.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

excise taxes, state lottery, etc.

You can fund a society with excise taxes and state lotteries(voluntary). This way private property is still sacrosanct and you have one government. You cannot have competing legal systems otherwise you could be tried 15 times by 15 different court systems.