Make sure you pay your taxes to the government that spies on you!

[myrkul]

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.   

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Again back to threatening people who disagree with you?

They're free to disagree. Just not to morally and financially support robbers and murderers.

[1715382889]

1715382889

[1715382889]

1715382889

[cryptoanarchist]

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.  

to be fair, I'm the one who wants to choke Hawker. If you pay taxes - you're a violent person. You're implying that you're on the "pay your taxes" side of the argument - so you're admitting that you are not only violent - and thus "irrational" by your argument- but you're also the initiator of the violence. Me wanting to choke someone for initiating the violence is just self defense.

Actually the reason you threatened to kill me is that I called you out for your trolling.  Stop trying to rationalise your being hypersensitive. 

Now you're a liar too. go back and read the thread.

[AzureEngineer]

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Violence begetting violence. You're doing a good job at making the wheel go round and round, I guess.

[Hawker]

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.   

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Again back to threatening people who disagree with you?

They're free to disagree. Just not to morally and financially support robbers and murderers.

Well that is clear enough.  People who disagree with you won't be killed if they behave as you dictate.

[myrkul]

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Violence begetting violence. You're doing a good job at making the wheel go round and round, I guess.

Defense does not beget more violence. It ends it.

People who disagree with you won't be killed if they behave as you dictate.

If by that, you mean don't threaten me and mine, yes, that's exactly right.

[AzureEngineer]

Defense does not beget more violence. It ends it.

Its almost as if I could hear a thousand history majors laugh hysterically.

If by that, you mean don't threaten me and mine, yes, that's exactly right.

Violence is okay as long as it is you doing it, got it.

[Hawker]

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Violence begetting violence. You're doing a good job at making the wheel go round and round, I guess.

Defense does not beget more violence. It ends it.

People who disagree with you won't be killed if they behave as you dictate.

If by that, you mean don't threaten me and mine, yes, that's exactly right.

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets.  It does explain why you regard it as a bad idea for the state to have a monopoly on violence.  You want a piece of the action yourself.

[cryptoanarchist]

Defense does not beget more violence. It ends it.

Its almost as if I could hear a thousand history majors laugh hysterically.

If by that, you mean don't threaten me and mine, yes, that's exactly right.

Violence is okay as long as it is you doing it, got it.

Are you capable of differentiating between the initiation of force, and self defense?

Are you saying that if someone breaks into my house and starts beating my kid, that I'm just as wrong for using violence against the intruder??

you're not making any sense.

[Hawker]

Defense does not beget more violence. It ends it.

Its almost as if I could hear a thousand history majors laugh hysterically.

If by that, you mean don't threaten me and mine, yes, that's exactly right.

Violence is okay as long as it is you doing it, got it.

Are you capable of differentiating between the initiation of force, and self defense?

Are you saying that if someone breaks into my house and starts beating my kid, that I'm just as wrong for using violence against the intruder??

you're not making any sense.

Um, you are the one making death threats.  No-one has entered your house or beaten your kid.  You are just the type of person who likes to use the treat of violence when you can't win a rational argument.

[AzureEngineer]

Are you capable of differentiating between the initiation of force, and self defense?

Both are forms of violence.

Are you saying that if someone breaks into my house and starts beating my kid, that I'm just as wrong for using violence against the intruder??

Depends on the situation. Why would someone break into your house and beat your kid?

you're not making any sense.

Considering you're the one threatening to choke people over an online forum, I don't believe you have the privilege to say things such as this.

[myrkul]

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets. 

And here are my only rules:
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET

There's a reason the libertarian mascot is a porcupine.

[myrkul]

Are you capable of differentiating between the initiation of force, and self defense?

Both are forms of violence.

So, no.

Do you support taxation, by the way? You never said.

[Hawker]

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets.  

And here are my only rules:
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET

There's a reason the libertarian mascot is a porcupine.

Oh really?  Who is this myrkul making threats then?

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.  

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Thats a threat to people who disagree with you.  Don't try running away from your thuggish tendencies.

[myrkul]

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets. 

And here are my only rules:
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET

There's a reason the libertarian mascot is a porcupine.

Oh really?  Who is this myrkul making threats then?

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.   

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Thats a threat.  Don't try running away from your thuggish tendencies.

That's no more a threat than the quills on a porcupine are. You pay people to rob, kidnap, or kill me, I am entitled to fight back.

[AzureEngineer]

So, no.

Do you support taxation, by the way? You never said.

If you live in a cabin built with your own two hands and get all of your food from a garden in your backyard and you do it all on non-government paid property, then no, I don't think you should pay taxes.

[myrkul]

Do you support taxation, by the way? You never said.

If you live in a cabin built with your own two hands and get all of your food from a garden in your backyard and you do it all on non-government paid property, then no, I don't think you should pay taxes.

But if I trade, in any way, with anyone else, I should pay a third party under penalty of kidnapping or death?

[wdmw]

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets. 

And here are my only rules:
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET

There's a reason the libertarian mascot is a porcupine.

Oh really?  Who is this myrkul making threats then?

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.   

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Thats a threat.  Don't try running away from your thuggish tendencies.

That's no more a threat than the quills on a porcupine are. You pay people to rob, kidnap, or kill me, I am entitled to fight back.

It's tedious reading two sides of an argument talking past each other.

You cannot reduce the statement that someone will defend themselves from violence into that same person being violent towards anyone who disagrees with them.  If you were to look at a suit, and one says it's blue and the other says it's grey, that's a disagreement.  Do we expect any violence to arise?

Alternately, I seriously doubt that myrkul has ever killed someone for paying their taxes. (correct me if I'm wrong)  It's great to stand on your principle, and the non-aggression principle supports your defense against aggression.  Agorists, anarchists, libertarians, voluntarists, etc. expand upon it and say that which is wrong for an individual is wrong for a collective, so taxation, conscription, war, etc. are illegitimate.  Though a statist would be your enemy, we aren't to the point of punching every statist in the nose because they are a statist.

[AzureEngineer]

But if I trade, in any way, with anyone else, I should pay a third party under penalty of kidnapping or death?

Depends on who you trade with and whether or not that person also lives in a cabin scenario as previously described. Basically, if at any point along the way you use a resource paid for by the government, then you should also pay taxes to that government. If you so much as walk down a paved road because its easier than romping through the woods you better be paying for the road you walk on, because it wasn't conjured up using fairy dust.

[myrkul]

Alternately, I seriously doubt that myrkul has ever killed someone for paying their taxes. (correct me if I'm wrong)  It's great to stand on your principle, and the non-aggression principle supports your defense against aggression.  Agorists, anarchists, libertarians, voluntarists, etc. expand upon it and say that which is wrong for an individual is wrong for a collective, so taxation, conscription, war, etc. are illegitimate.  Though a statist would be your enemy, we aren't to the point of punching every statist in the nose because they are a statist.

I haven't, and I honestly wouldn't. That's quite extreme. I would, however, point out that they are supporting aggression, and if that doesn't change their mind, I will refuse to associate with them. Only if they continued to force themselves and their views on me, would I act in defense. Hawker's been pretty adamant about forcing his views on me.

If you so much as walk down a paved road because its easier than romping through the woods you better be paying for the road you walk on, because it wasn't conjured up using fairy dust.

Sure, if I can only pay for the services I use. For instance, I'd rather not pay for the bombing and gunning down of civilians (or anyone, really) in the middle east. Can I opt out of that, Or do I have to pay for the whole package deal because I walked down a road?

[Hawker]

Quite a vicious little chap aren't you?  Freedom means obeying your rules and those that disagree are legitimate targets.  

And here are my only rules:
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET

There's a reason the libertarian mascot is a porcupine.

Oh really?  Who is this myrkul making threats then?

I would get in this argument but I don't want myrkul threatening to choke me, too. Violent people are so irrational.  

Now, why would I do that?

Unless you're going to morally and financially support the people who would rob me, kidnap me, or potentially even murder me?

Thats a threat.  Don't try running away from your thuggish tendencies.

That's no more a threat than the quills on a porcupine are. You pay people to rob, kidnap, or kill me, I am entitled to fight back.

So everyone who pays taxes and disagrees with you is a legitimate target.  That kind of thuggish "You put me in this position so you've only yourself to blame for being stabbed." attitude is exactly what a decent law and order system is designed to protect us against.