[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload5 per post.


Ya'll need Mises.

File: 95a43b2b9adbf67⋯.jpg (538.05 KB,2000x1333,2000:1333,n8cj0d.jpg)

 No.103526

What are the best arguments for and against minarchism vs anarchism?

Meaning, should there be a state that serves an extremely limited function (power to execute murderers, defense of country) or none at all (all social functions predicated on mutual consent)?

I'm having a hard time reconciling ancap with Romans 13's apparent affirmation that some form of government is tasked by God with the responsibility to execute proven criminals, and I must recognize scripture as inerrant.

I know Romans 13 is used as just a blanket proof text for all state action and they're obviously committing eisegesis in those cases (roads, firemen).

Both of these positions are libertarian and have impressive figures on each side.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103527

File: 85a803eeadee038⋯.jpg (187.33 KB,926x1200,463:600,without.jpg)

Monarchism doesn't make much sense. Why delegate most, but not all, faculties to the free market? If the free market system works (pro-tip: it does) then it'll work for all aspects of society and you don't need a government to force things upon people (see pic related). The Romans 13 argument is a very tricky one, and I'm not savvy enough with scripture and history (yet) to really offer a good rebuttal to it. Maybe later when I'm off work and have some more time I'll try my best at unpacking that chapter.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103528

>>103527

Minarchism*

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103529

>>103527

I don't see a free market means of performing executions.

Suppose the libertarian ideal was accomplished and the world is composed of covenant communities. A man opts in to a community that has a rule "murderers will be executed". He later is found guilty of murder and is executed. Was a state not just established, or not since it was an agreed upon standard?

What if it was a second generation inhabitant?

Am I seeing a contradiction that isn't there?

Lew Rockwell has a great libertarian take on Romans 13 up on lewrockwell.com

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103530

>>103529

>trying to wiggle your way out of what is clearly stated in the scripture

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103531

>>103526

There are many, but I think there are two that matter the most: the calculation problem and the state in the future. The calculation problem without a shadow of a doubt proves that a government, no matter how-well intentioned or competent, can never provide a service as effectively as the market. There are a variety of claims people make to prove that a certain market (usually security) is fundamentally different from other markets, and thus benefits from state control. There are a variety of counters to this that show security is a market like any other, with most of them helpfully compiled in Hoppe's Myth of National Defense. But all of these arguments, when you get down to it, stem from the calculation problem.

The second argument against minarchism is that it will very rarely stay minarchism. Constitutions are just pieces of paper that are interpreted by the men they seek to limit, and separation of power means nothing when there's no real incentive against the separate powers from colluding. Even the best constructed minarchist state will grow in size and scope over time, getting more bloated, less efficient, and more invasive. Restoring the natural order completely, without leaving the state in charge of anything, prevents this inevitable occurrence.

I'll second the other guy's recommendation of Rockwell's piece on Romans 13. Episode 9 of Bob Murphy's podcast has a guest, Norman Horn, that also makes a pretty good take on the subject if you prefer audio to text. My own take on the passage is this: Jesus tells men to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." This is effectively a tautology from a property rights standpoint–if Caesar owns something, you give it to him. But it doesn't say what is and is not Caesar's. If it can be proved that taxation is theft–and it can–then taxes do not belong to Caesar. If they do not belong to him, you are under no obligation to deliver them to him.

>inb4 "hurr durr, you're just creatively interpreting the passage to your own benefit"

Anyone who knows the context of the passage knows that Christ was essentially being lead into a kafka-trap by being asked that question, by someone who wished to discredit him. An enigmatic response which requires some level of interpretation to understand is essential to escaping such an entrapment.

>>103529

>I don't see a free market means of performing executions.

That's because there isn't, even in a covenant community you can't break the NAP. And according to Rothbardian contract theory, you cannot alienate your future will, meaning that the only contracts which are truly enforceable are those which would result in theft if they are broken. Because of this, you cannot compel someone to give up property rights over themselves by virtue of a piece of paper. Even if he agreed at time of signing, if he disagrees now such a contract is not enforceable. At best, you can banish him from your covenant community. If he refuses to leave after you banish him, he is trespassing, and you may kill him in self defense.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103532

>>103530

>Being a tripfaggot

>Having no reading comprehension

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103533

File: 92727f822031c45⋯.jpg (689.21 KB,2400x1597,2400:1597,minden_90710440.jpg)

It doesn't matter if a free society would be more efficient, people will never want it and people's desires create society. Minarchism is the only viable option.

Also, it's not like the State can't create any value, it just does so arbitrarily and inefficiently, but it can still create the feeling of a just society.

Sweden, Norway, etc may not be free societies but it's not like people are unhappy or assholes, if anything the State pampered them so much that they're human kakapos now, completely unable to defend themselves.

Anarcho-capitalism and real economics must be known to make good political actions, even coercitive one because at least you know it's a coercitive action.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103535

File: 3bf85f489155c96⋯.webm (685.62 KB,480x360,4:3,Be Suspicious.webm)

>>103532

Remember how we deal with them.

>>103533

>people will never want it and people's desires create society

Why are you assuming liberty has to be achieved everywhere all at once for it to be achieved at all? We're not Marxists, we don't fantasize about RISING UP all over the world to achieve some utopian pipe dream. Liberty is won through secession. Those who want liberty will secede from the state. Those who do not want it, will not.

>it's not like the State can't create any value

It can't, by definition. Value is created through voluntary transactions, because voluntary transactions are by definition mutually beneficial. The state, being borne out of coercion, can never be a product of voluntary transaction, and as a result can never create value, only destroy it.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103536

>>103531

Romans 13 isn't the render unto caesar passage

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103539

>>103536

Well, that's my take on the Render unto Caesar passage.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103541

>>103535

things have value because they're valued. The State can create things that have more value than the resources it seized.

The problem is that the thing is pretty random and also coercitive.

That said, I should have been more precise, because I didn't mean in that case that the State can create value, I meant that things that the State creates can have value.

For example a park that can be enjoyed by everyone has value and can be well-manteined. Of course it's created with seized resources, but it's not such as big a tragedy as we make it out to be.

Since people want the State, ancaps should keep study and spread ancap shit, but also help the State allocate coerced resources in a way that benefits society.

We can be autistic all we want, but the truth is that if the State spends money for a park, it's better than if it spends the money for a million-dollar consultancy on child transgenderism.

Yes, we can't know for sure which of the two is better since they'll be payed with stolen resources, but in the real world we know, and we should stop being such little shit always closed in our world that goes nowhere.

This is very important because the fact that libertarians/ancaps don't take part in politics, mean that people who don't give a shit about freedom will get more and more power, and those who give a shit won't take part in politics because there is no prize or support from ancaps/libertarians.

I mean, even Ron Paul was attacked by certain libertarians/ancaps because he wasn't "pure enough". At that point, if that's how people who understand liberty want to act, fuck them and fuck we all, we deserve to suffer.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.103545

File: ec714043cb37f9e⋯.jpg (44.23 KB,750x585,50:39,sunglasses.jpg)

>>103541

>I meant that things that the State creates can have value.

>For example a park that can be enjoyed by everyone has value and can be well-manteined. Of course it's created with seized resources, but it's not such as big a tragedy as we make it out to be.

You're forgetting the opportunity cost. Obviously the output of the state will have some sort of value to most people. But it will always be higher in price and smaller in quantity than what the unrestricted market would have done with those resources. That is what is meant when people say that the state destroys value. It is not that the state destroys value because it incompetently allocates resources; yes, it does allocate them incompetently, but that is not how it destroys value. Even if you ignore the Misesian Calculation Problem, and assume the state is somehow capable of allocating resources just as effectively as the market, it still destroys value, because value is created by voluntary transactions. In a voluntary transaction both parties are better off after the transaction than they were before. Even if its output was of the utmost quality, it must still be said that the state destroys value because it destroys voluntary transactions, not just through coercion, but by the opportunity cost of the voluntary transactions that would have taken place had the state not intervened.

You are correct in that the state's outputs are not completely worthless, and some forms of output are obviously less worthless than others, particularly if they move in the direction of undoing previous coercion. But I believe you're underestimating just how damaging state intervention truly is.

>but in the real world we know, and we should stop being such little shit always closed in our world that goes nowhere.

Does anyone actually do this? The very fact that we're discussing our frustrations on a Canadian cave painting website instead of quietly fuming is already in itself a political interaction. Places like the Mises Institute do a fair bit to get more people interested in liberty, and issue-oriented lobby groups like the GOA or the various pro-life groups are working to make those ideas a policy reality. The most influential voices in libertarian circles aren't against political action by any means. Yes, you do have that autistic "ROOO! Voting is COERCION!!1!" crowd, but thanks to their own detachment they don't have a lot of influence. It's just a bunch of apathetic losers who found a way to turn their apathy into virtue-signaling.

Libertarians have political machinery in place. Not a lot, granted, and it's not all that sophisticated compared to what the Bolshevik scum have, but it is there. And even though our political advocacy is on the primitive side, the fact that it exists tells me you're not completely correct in saying libertarians are stuck arguing with themselves and going nowhere.

So let's look at that primitive political machinery with some perspective. Yes, compared to the Marxists our game is weak. But the Marxists have been doing this for a good 150 years. As a political animal, libertarianism hasn't been around nearly as long, despite our very long intellectual history (which has arguably been around as long as Cicero). The ideas of many disparate thinkers weren't unified into a single mode of thought until Mises published Human Action in 1949. Rothbard's Libertarian Manifesto, which translated theory into more coherent policy goals, was only published in 1973. Marx did largely the same thing, translating leftist gobbledygook into a lie just barely coherent enough to seem plausible to some people, almost exactly a century earlier. He wrote his own manifesto in 1849 and Das Kapital in 1867. Considering our late start in the political game, I would say we've made incredible headway. Almost all the youth-oriented right wing activist groups, such as Turning Point USA, YAL, FEE, Mises U, and to a certain extent the Heritage Foundation, base themselves around the pursuit of liberty. Only 50 years ago Rothbard said he believed there to be 25 anarcho-capitalists in all the world. Look at where we are now. Still very clearly a minority, but not nearly such an obscure one. Almost everyone Internet-savvy has at least heard of anarcho-capitalism, most likely through memes such as everyone's favorite smiling sphere. We've had a Presidential candidate get the plurality vote in a major primary, and only lose the nomination due to Jewry with the rules. Considering that the commies have had a hundred year head-start, I'd say we're doing pretty well all things considered. We have a long, long, ways to go, but the way you're speaking, you're ignoring how far we've come already.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]