Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss (Read 6453 times)
Josh
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Stop looking at me like
that, you pervert.

Posts: 4259
Location: Inside your girlfriend
Joined: Aug 8th, 2010
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #60 - Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:57am
Print Post  
Yeah, guys. It's obviously factual that anarchy = chaos. We don't need evidence for that. We just need to keep reiterating it and not use our brains.
  

I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Josh
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Stop looking at me like
that, you pervert.

Posts: 4259
Location: Inside your girlfriend
Joined: Aug 8th, 2010
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #61 - Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:01pm
Print Post  
Shiva_TD wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:50am:
That is a fact that the anarchists fail to address. Without government there is no "rule of law" so nothing is illegal.

Seriously, are you trolling this forum? All we've been doing is explaining common law and DRO's to you and you say anarchists never "address it." If you actually considered our arguments and you had actual objections, that would be respectable, but you don't even recognize that we are proposing alternative solutions.
  

I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Shiva_TD
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1593
Location: Washington (State)
Joined: Dec 12th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #62 - Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:05pm
Print Post  
Josh wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:57am:
Yeah, guys. It's obviously factual that anarchy = chaos. We don't need evidence for that. We just need to keep reiterating it and not use our brains.


Anarchy = Lawless Society = Chaos

Under anarchy there is no government and law and order can only exist under the authority of government established by a social contract.

Murder, rape, kidnapping, robbery, and assault are all "legal" under anarchy as there is no social contract where people have agreed to form a government to establish law and order for everyone in the nation.

Under anarchy "five of us" can voluntarily get together and agree to not murder, rape, kidnap, rob or assault each other but that agreement does not extend to anyone else. A person that has not agreed to the voluntary agreement is free to commit murder, rape, kidnap, rob, or assault others, including us, as they are not constrained by our agreement nor do we have any authority to enforce it upon them.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Josh
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Stop looking at me like
that, you pervert.

Posts: 4259
Location: Inside your girlfriend
Joined: Aug 8th, 2010
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #63 - Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:07pm
Print Post  
[quote author=506B6A75625C5747030 link=1387394593/62#62 date=1388163947]law and order can only exist under the authority of government established by a social contract.
[/quote]
BACK UP THE STATEMENT WITH SOME SORT OF EVIDENCE
  

I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2119
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #64 - Dec 27th, 2013 at 3:41pm
Print Post  
Shiva_TD wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:05pm:
Anarchy = Lawless Society = Chaos




*yawn* We can play this game too.

Shiva = Nonsense = Marxist
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Shiva_TD
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1593
Location: Washington (State)
Joined: Dec 12th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #65 - Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:34am
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 3:41pm:
*yawn* We can play this game too.


If there is no government, which is the foundation of anarchy, then there are no laws. Is that not correct?

People mention the "common law" but common law is established by legal precedent from the decisions of the courts and the courts are a component of government.

If there are no laws then everything is legal including rape, murder, theft, and violence of any kind.

We have had some here propose "private law enforcement based upon contract" but under contract law the only persons subjected to the conditions of the contract are those that voluntarily sign it. Private law enforcement cannot exercise any authority over a person that is not an explicit party to the contract.

Every person in a town could sign a contract for private law enforcement but an out of town bank robber would not sign it, could come into town, rob the bank, and leave and private law enforcement could not pursue that person. It has no jurisdiction to impose it's authority upon a person that didn't voluntarily submit to it's authority.

Only under a "social contract" where the people agree to the conditions for establishing the contents of the social contract can jurisdiction and authority be imposed upon all of those in society. The social contract creates government and the government can exercise authority based upon the social contract.

The problem we have in America today is not the social contract but instead it is the violations of the social contract by the politicians. That is the problem and nothing more. There is nothing inherently wrong with the US Constitution but instead the problem is with government exceeding it's authority under the contract.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2119
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #66 - Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:36pm
Print Post  
Shiva_TD wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:34am:
If there is no government, which is the foundation of anarchy, then there are no laws. Is that not correct?



Nope, couldn't be any more incorrect. This is what we call the political slander method to defining opposing views. But since we have been down this road before, credibility matters. If you want to run around telling people the world is flat, and the sun orbits the earth, and *insert old urban myth here*, then that is your choice and your own reputation to destroy.

Also, the social contract is not agreed upon. That is why it is a social contract. Any contract that if enforced by a negative, is already a conflict of being a contract itself. ie: If you don't like the color of the sky, you should just kill yourself.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Shiva_TD
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 1593
Location: Washington (State)
Joined: Dec 12th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #67 - Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:24pm
Print Post  
Crystallas wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:36pm:
Nope, couldn't be any more incorrect. This is what we call the political slander method to defining opposing views. But since we have been down this road before, credibility matters. If you want to run around telling people the world is flat, and the sun orbits the earth, and *insert old urban myth here*, then that is your choice and your own reputation to destroy.


I merely use the dictionary definition of anarchy and my statements are very accurate based upon that definition.

Quote:
anarchy noun \ˈa-nər-kē, -ˌnr-\

: a situation of confusion and wild behavior in which the people in a country, group, organization, etc., are not controlled by rules or laws


1
a : absence of government

b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

2
a : absence or denial of any authority or established order

b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature Israel Shenker>


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy

Now perhaps some people have a "secret" definition of anarchy that no one except them happen to be aware of but based upon the known definition of "anarchy" there is no government or laws so everything is "legal" in such a society.

Anarchy is not Minarchism.

Crystallas wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:36pm:
Also, the social contract is not agreed upon. That is why it is a social contract. Any contract that if enforced by a negative, is already a conflict of being a contract itself. ie: If you don't like the color of the sky, you should just kill yourself.


It is the criteria for establishement of the social contract that is agreed upon (generally contained in the contract itself) and not the contract itself. The contract is created based upon the conditions and criteria agreed to. For that we basically have 100% agreement when it came to creation of the US Constitution as every state adopted the Constitution during it's initial adoption or agreed to it upon becoming a State. The US Constitution is a social contract between the "states" and not the "People" and the "States" obtained their authority by the People under the State Constitutions.

While I can state that African-Americans brought to the US involuntarily and Native-Americans did not agree to the Social Contracts that exemption cannot be made for any voluntary immigrant to the United States.

Everyone voluntarily coming to the United States agreed to the fundamental rules of democracy and all of our social contracts are based upon democracy in the Unite States. Our "forefathers" established the "Social Contracts" in America and provide us with the means to change them whenever we choose to do so based upon specific criteria.

This is no different than a "Corporate Charter" that is created by the original stockholders and pass on as the stockholders in the corporation change over time. If a person inherits stock in a corporation they don't get a say in the originail "Corporate Charter" that defined the means of amendment. They can use the established means of amendment to change the corporate charter though.

It is no different in a nation where the People establish the criteria voluntarily for the "Social Contract" and I don't know why some people seem to have a problem with understanding this fact.

Of course we can argue against "involuntary" social contracts imposed by fiat of the rulers but that is not the case in the United States.

We can also point out that the entire United States government can be abolished with a simple stroke of the pen... so long as 3/4ths of the States agree to abolish the US government!!!

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Land of Freedom
Libertarian's Forum Administrator
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 754
Location: The Land of Freedom
Joined: Apr 11th, 2009
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #68 - Dec 29th, 2013 at 2:00pm
Print Post  
LizLove wrote on Dec 18th, 2013 at 2:23pm:
Key points I personally think will bring actual change:
-Bring monetary policy under democratic control by prohibiting private banks from creating money, thus restoring government's Constitutional authority.



Shouldn't money be private rather than governments printing it? What's democratic control of monetary policy? Do we vote to put printed money in our pockets? Or do politicians say people voted to put money in their favorite government projects? And we thought there was unstable money under the Fed. Imagine democratic money.
  

LibertariansForum.com The LF Administrator.
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Crystallas
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2119
Location: R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution
Joined: May 4th, 2011
Re: Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Reply #69 - Dec 29th, 2013 at 6:09pm
Print Post  
Shiva_TD wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:24pm:
I merely use the dictionary definition of anarchy and my statements are very accurate based upon that definition.



Like I said, we've been down this road before. Which is why discussing anything with you is useless.
This is the correct definition. Any other definition is based on political bias. Obvious bias. When I or many others say anarchy, it refers to this widely used definition. So everything in context refers to this definition, and arguing based on your own definition, or any politically biased definition, would be basically arguing against your own words. Just remember that, you are 100% arguing against yourself.

Anarchy: Without ruling class.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Green Party!? Jill Stein? Yesss
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy