• With due respect to your

    endless love, romantic story, for which we are all doubtless shedding tears of joy. Nevertheless, as long as we have a gigantic welfare state, we will regulate people coming into the country. If you do get laid off, public aid will be open to you and your citizen bride. Therefore, it is important to decide if your income is secure before permitting you to permanently import your bride.

    This would be just the same for any private anarchist cooperative of property owners providing defense and mutual aid services. They wouldn't be interested in paying for your bride and her extended family if they thought your income was insecure.

    Those are the risks you take when you decide to marry someone who's not part of your country / property cooperative.

    Sincerely,
    Concerned anarchist

  • Let's continue on

    For the hell of it
    Well that line doesn't go
    Does not quite fit

    Start here instead,

    God's word it was
    Before all else
    Before Abraham was
    I am, He said

    His name, it is
    I am what I am
    Not a shade was made
    Before the word was said

    The word
    Made Flesh
    Logos, Platonic
    The mind of God

    Quite ironic
    Quite ironic
    Indeed, indeed
    The word we call

    When in need
    Father, father
    Abba, father
    To others, Godspeed

    We wish, we wish
    That God be unhidden
    We don't hide our faces
    We look up, unbidden

    Tyre and sidon?
    Were more modest than we
    For when we look in Christ
    Our reflection we see

  • What can you give?

    Your love, of course
    The course you run
    The path you walk

    Keep yourself up
    Hold up others
    Love your God
    Love your Brother

    What more can anyone give
    Than to finish the race
    And in faith live
    Your role, your place

    For God that's enough
    He gives his grace

    But hey
    If you find yourself in doubt
    Rolling in hate
    Hope, without

    Try to bear up, keep your strength
    Despite the pull, temptations way
    The draw of faction, contentiousness
    The lonely path to selfishness

    The path to sin
    Paved with pleasure
    Regress to death
    Take it, never

    Throwing back the sacrifice
    In the face of the only Christ
    That will ever come
    The only God

    Closing in, Heart is hard
    Feeding on wrath, Sewing division
    Crooked path
    Irrevocable decision

  • Let's revive this thread

    so I can rummage through my head
    for some fun, some words
    for this thread of verse
    rhymes are better, factions worse
    Round two, not first

  • I don't see how anyone could

    take that sentence seriously. There is zero, zip, none, nada, "force" involved in tricking someone to depart with their property. Buyer beware. In fact, to the contrary, using force to ban fraud is the use of force to protect the stupid from the crafty. It is a violation of NAP, justified by the beneficial effect that it allows average people to engage in commerce and contracts with protection from the most egregiously dishonest sharp practices (tho not all sharp practices, by far). Further, it prevents the forceful retaliation of jsutifiably pissed off people who have been deceived. Still, it has no connection even remotely to force or aggression.

    Booya, we discovered a new gigantic hole, and good violation, of the NAP.

  • So if the federal government opened all federally owned land up

    to everyone, as commons, prohibiting anyone to own any of it or to industrially pollute it, would that be bad? Why do you guys think everything in the world needs to be under the dictatorship of a private owner?

  • You're still assuming

    a software algorithm could be programmed into a computer that is comparable to a human mind. Where's the evidence?

  • Who knows

    Impossible to predict what tech will do.

  • I think that

    communications of a threatening nature, extorting or coercing something, would count.

    Also, somehow, the geniuses have determined that fraud is force, which makes no sense at all. But if you, a Nigerian Prince, convince me to fund your escape from house arrest, with the help of john jay, and I lose the money, you have committed aggression.

    I think they just made this up after a late night of drinking when they realized that non aggression doesn't cover fraud, so they just agreed to pretend it does, when it doesn't.

    Just like kyletownsend and others agreed to pretend that it's self defense to capture an accused person and hold a trial, when clearly its not self defense.

    NAP is crap.

  • 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.