Comment: Serving justice doesn't require you give up any liberty.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: just so i understand you (see in situ)

Serving justice doesn't require you give up any liberty.

"just so i understand you correctly, you're saying that you'll give up some liberty for the security that other people won't infringe on your liberty?"

You don't understand anything I'm talking about, even though I've put it into the most simple terms possible. Serving justice doesn't require you give up any liberty, but it does require you take another persons liberty, and that's what Anarchists hate. They hate the idea of justice, because for the most part they're nihilists, hedonists, and libertines who just want to destroy. They FEAR justice, and they should.

Should people not have the right to self defense, because that's what justice is?

"all i'm saying is worry about yourself only and don't rely of the government for a solution"

You HAVE TO defend more than just your own liberty or you'll never get it. If you try to defend just your own, you'll quickly become outgunned by covetous men. All they'll need to do to take it is bring more force to bare against you than you have to defend yourself. (Might makes right.) People will gang up on you and take what they covet.

It's not unjust to want your own liberty. Collectivism CAN serve peace and justice:

Imagine a collective of people, defending individual liberty. An interesting idea aye? It seems like a paradox, but it's not. Does it make me a collectivist if the collective I serve defends individual liberty?

-If people want liberty, the collective can serve justice: "Freedom, liberty, and their common defense."

-If people covet plunder and slaves, the collective serves injustice: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Serving justice does not require sacrifice, but in a world filled with violent and covetous people, defending liberty may just cost you your life.