Comment: It's so CLOSE that they're right next door to one another. :)

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Not even CLOSE to semantic. (see in situ)

It's so CLOSE that they're right next door to one another. :)

"Do I have to go grab my breakdown on the jurisdiction explanation and requote it?"

It didn't apply then so why bring it up again.

"You failed to show how the state based system could work without becoming corrupt and having bad laws."

That's like asking someone to show you how to live perfectly and if that's the kind of mindset that's thriving behind Anarchy, it is in FACT pie-in-the-sky as I've stated on many other threads. Not everything mind you but...

I can show you ideas that would limit it but what your ideology might not address among a few other things, is human nature. In my view this is why minarchy is the more realistic ideology... it can address the imperfections of man.

And I'm not saying this as an insult but this is why I've stated that socialism is similar to Anarchy in that they both look great on paper. Now Anarchy is a lot better in it's attempts to equalize the playing field and makes leaps above socialism in morality but it is still flawed.

Until you hash out the details amongst yourselves as Anarchist to a degree that they don't lend themselves to wild west solutions or feudalistic behaviors, the rest of the "civilized" world won't ever move into that direction.

I'm not sure you can without having some sort of blanket law system that all or the "majority" of the nation, or regions agree to.. doesn't mean that system has to have a monopoly.

I have a busy day today, I'm going to TRY and get some work done. :)

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.