• He used purple font

    to deny that he's Satan. Therefore, Satan.

  • Expanding on the parent child relationship

    It's primarily a relationship of investment. The parents are literally creating something in their own image, passing on their own knowledge, beliefs, physical traits, and investing in the success of their children. Economic success, so that they have someone to take care of them in their old age. Success in having their own families, to continue the process with future generations. The familial bond and investment is one of investment and stewardship over generations.

    Is that a good analogy to government?

    Do parents tax their children? Do parents govern their non dependent adult children? No, and no. Does the government age and depend on the next generation?

    Society is an organization has some parallels; its everyone investing in an infrastructure that is mutually beneficial, like mutual aid and defense. Young people are expected to care for old people more broadly than just the nuclear family. Young people who have no direct family are expected to be cared for and raised up by some society-institution, with a public focus, not just blood relation or personal friendship with the parents.

    If every function which modern governments, and public institutions more broadly, fulfill, was fulfilled fully within family or extended family entitles, as it once was, then there would be no state besides conquering armies. There'd be no need for voluntarily organized governments with popular support (not for politicians, but for the state in general).

    We're far, far away from a time where families can provide these services. Some people believe that in a world with no government, firms would sprout up to provide all these services in a stable, efficient way and so on. For those of us who don't buy that, we support the existence of some government, because it benefits us and our interests.

  • Machines do

    what they're programmed to do.

    Is there any evidence otherwise, or just science fiction fantasy?

  • That would be a relationship

    That would be a relationship of dependency on the one side, and stewardship on the other.

    Liberty thrives best when people are least dependent economically, and least dependent for security, on others. We have drifted far from the level of individual / family autonomy, largely for economic and technological reasons, and so have voluntarily given up the levels of political autonomy earlier generations had.

    A person with no economic autonomy, working paycheck to paycheck for corporation, itself entwined with the government, and dependent on publicly provisioned services he could never afford or manage on his income, will never have political autonomy, and won't demand it.

    The project is to reverse that trend as much as feasible within modern technological and economic conditions. Or, hope those conditions move in a favorable way toward individual economic and physical security autonomy.

  • garbage

    .

  • Come on now

    I know which ones I commit.

  • lol

    I like that turn of phrase.

  • buZz off

    little bee

  • If the

    four property owners were four thousand, and ceded some property around the perimeter as a public roadway, agreeing to control access, and to call themselves Nation, their nationality being Nationalese, and speaking the nationalese tongue, then it would be okay?

    If the firm they hired to control access to this area instead opened access to everyone, that would be wrong?

  • Haha

    you guys are purple.

  • Yes

    but the amount of people who could come in through property owners' permission would be small, and would not apply to public spaces. Unless you are saying there should be no public spaces.

    If there was just private property, people would need to arrange their travel with property owners or groups of them. Since most Americans don't want open immigration, they would limit is as property owners, just as they now wish to do through the public control of borders. Same outcome, immigration restriction.

    On your view, the public spaces should just be funnels for everyone in the world to come into America and sign up for public services paid for and provided to citizens, against the will of the majority of property owners.

  • Very interesting

    !

  • Hoppe's analysis is correct

    Just imagine 4 property owners, who designate some public area around four properties. They agree between themselves they don't want open traffic on the public areas, but controlled traffic. They designate a person to control access to the public area, and that person, instead of following the rules of the property owners, invites 15 people in via the public area who the property owners agreed not to invite.

    There's really only two possibilities:

    1) Public property is invalid.

    In this case, there can't be open roads, you just have to leap frog from property owner to property owner, perhaps by helicopter?

    2) Property owners can designate and control access to public property.

    In this case, immigration controls in and out of the property-ownership perimeter accord with the will of the property owners.

  • UUUUGHHHHHHH

    Not you again.

  • ; )

    Love it

  • Kind of funny

    in a sad way, undermines the grandiosity of the break into space. We didn't have the confidence to go in head first, sent a dog. O, humanity. Well, o russia anyway.

  • New phrase

    "Im so hungry I could eat a gay hamburger"

  • I think

    they had their sense of values and independence, but it was more a sense of power and independence, permitting NAP violations, and less a system of mutually binding ethics. It was a practical system for its time and place, but has no bearing whatsoever on modern economic, technological and ideological conditions. I think between ourselves at least we can admit neither of us are vikings. Well, Smudge and seth might not admit it, but we can. David Friedman sure as shyt isn't.

  • Well

    without referencing the text, merely working from memory, old Pauly told those Corinthians that they, not ten paces from the christs death, within the shadow of the cross were already forming factions, judging each other on who baptized them, building out systems for all too human rewards, merits, exclusions and judging; meanwhile, some of them were fscking their fathers wives and going to Roman law to settle disputes. O, humanity.

    Well, can we expect to be better than those Christians? Neither yes nor no is a very encouraging answer.

    Love and peace

  • Magic

    .