No.98565
Can we start a catalog of common threads. I feel like we have the same conversations every few months because threads 404 after a period.
Common topics like
>Chicago vs Austrian Schools
>Mutualism
>Why the different types of socialism suck
>Intellectual Property debate
>Abortion
>Open vs Closed Borders
>Hoppe and Paleolibertarians
>Oligopoly in AnCap and Natural Monopolies
>Egoism and Stirner
>Why /pol/ and NeetSoc are stupid
Feel free to name any more common threads that crop up every few months
____________________________
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.98566
>general threads
Threads are supposed to 404, and the userbase shifts continually. That's why "we" may seem to have the same conversations, because there is no "we". Filthy collectivist.
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.98567
>>98566
>there is no "we". Filthy collectivist.
Sure there is, all 20 of us.
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.98568
At least set up an archive
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.98583
The kids body isnt yours…
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.98584
>>98583
The fetus's body belongs to its host.
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.98585
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.98603
>>98584
The child is an individual that didn't choose to be born, and since the mother inflicted life on it against its will, the mother actually violated NAP. So the mothers body belongs to the child until its born.
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.98613
>>98565
>That pic
The average mind of a woman, everyone. Murdering human life is ok because it's inconvenient to you.
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.98625
>>98603
Does giving someone something count as aggression? The child could always kill themselves after all. Would it be aggression for me to wire some money into someone's bank account without their consent? They could always destroy the money. Sure, the nature of wealth means that they'd probably not want to do it but that isn't forcing them not to destroy the money.
Also, how is it possible to aggress upon a non-existent entity?
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.98626
>>98603
>the mother actually violated NAP. So the mothers body belongs to the child until its born.
Those two statements are logically unrelated. There's no "so" about it.
I fail to see why you people disagree that parents own their children. Surely you don't think children get to decide where they go to school, what they eat, who they associate with, whether or not to get jobs or anything else. Clearly they have no agency of their own. That implies they're not owners but owned. If parents can ruin a child's life and damn them to an eternity of poor socialization, poor health, poor skills, debt and various other forms of ruin why can't they also simply murder their child? If your answer is "because it's wrong", surely it is; It is wrong to do a great many things that you have every right to do with your property.
>>98625
>Does giving someone something count as aggression?
Aggression implies forcing someone to do something, I'd reckon. So while giving someone something like cash is easily seen as "not aggression, but charity", sticking them with a bill (an obligation) can easily be seen as an act of aggression. After all there is generally an implicit threat in every bill. Perhaps they both are. If you are the unwilling recipient of money, your bank account is being violated by foreign funds. Just because something is easy to shirk (in the case of money, just spend it, just throw it away, etc) and just because someone else thought a gift was charitable doesn't mean it isn't actually harmful or rights violating. After all, I'm sure you've heard plenty about the USA liberating foreigners.
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.98627
>>98626
Children do have agency though. Our society just treats them as though they have no agency because they're ignorant about a lot of things and also because parents (voters) want to treat their children like property to stroke their ego/spread their ideology/get free labor/whatever.
Newborns don't have agency, they're basically soulless animals. I don't see anything wrong with infanticide.
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.98628
>>98626
Well, technically, parents aren't forcing their children into life. They are creating the environment that is necessary for life. Once the sperm fertilizes the egg the mother is just providing nutrients, it's the collection of cells that we call a zygote or a fetus's actions that lead to it developing into a baby. No, it doesn't really have a mind, but if we can say that it can have its rights violated regardless of that we're accepting that it's a moral agent and can thus be held accountable for such things.
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.98637
>>98625
>life is heavenly
What kind of a insular hedonist are you my friend.
>Also, how is it possible to aggress upon a non-existent entity?
NAP doesn't require a victim, it's a principle, you're violating the principle itself not some person.
>>98626
A) You can't own people in libertarianism, that isn't how it works. Even a sane rational adult couldn't sign away their freedom in a contract.
B) A child is a conscious actor and therefore killing them violates NAP. You could do it, but by having done so you forfeit your right to life and any random passer-by has the right to kill you offhand.
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.98657
>>98628
i have read somewhere that fetuses can have dreams so they sort of have minds
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.98699
>>98637
>NAP doesn't require a victim
That's the dumbest shit i've ever heard in a while.
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.98727
>>98699
It's a fucking principle you moron, it's in the name.
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.98736
>>98727
It's a principle governing your interaction with other people. By definition, it can't really operate in isolation.
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.98772
>>98736
Aggression doesn't mean someone is hurt. If I wave my gun around, without shooting anyone, but still clearly acting in an aggressive manner, it still breaks NAP and you can shoot me dead.
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.98776
>>98613
>>98603
>>98627
Until the second the fetus leaves the womb and has its umbilical cord severed it remains reliant effectivly parasitically leeching off of the energy and resources (Financial / physical etc) of the mother
Until it is born the fetus is nothing more then a parasite like a hookworm lodged in your foot
And it is completely up to the mothers agency whether she would like to continue to allow parasites to leech off her
<TLDR
the woman may act as she pleases
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.98777
>>98772
>Aggression doesn't mean someone is hurt.
Don't put words in my mouth nigger, where did I say NAP requires someone to be hurt? In order to be aggressive, there needs to be a person or entity against whom you are aggressing.
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.98778
>>98777
Or a group or people, or a potential group or people who isn't even there, but might be one day. In other words the idea of NAP being applied to simple person to person conflict is wrong, and before you continue I suggest you read the prior few posts to avoid putting words in my mouth.
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.98779
>>98776
>Until the second the fetus leaves the womb and has its umbilical cord severed it remains reliant effectivly parasitically leeching off of the energy and resources (Financial / physical etc) of the mother
But the fetus did not decide to do this. The mother decided to create the fetus and force it to use her resources.
If I put a gun to your head and forced you to take my wallet, are you still a thief? Can I kill you for the theft?
What a ridiculously incomplete morality.
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.98780
>>98778
>Or a group or people
Yes, that's what is implied by "or entity." Either a group of people, or a covenant community (as defined by private property), whose terms of lease you have violated.
>or a potential group or people who isn't even there, but might be one day.
No, that's retarded. The NAP, and any legal theory based on it, deals strictly in actions committed by one entity onto another entity whose rights have been violated. Saying it applies to things that only exist in potentiality effectively means that it can apply to whatever you wish, as "potential" is such an arbitrary and unprovable concept. It has no place in legal theory.
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.98781
>>98779
Oh I forgot to post an image of someone I like but who is dead and irrelevant to the discussion, in the hopes that another user will side with me in this discussion because of our shared like of the dead guy.
>>98780
The NAP isn't a law, it's a principle, we went over this.
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.98782
>>98781
Semantics play isn't enough to discount my argument. You can't aggress against people that aren't there, but might be one day, because that's a group which includes every fucking person alive or who might be alive one day. You can't aggress without aggressing against somebody or something. There has to be a victim.
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.98800
>>98779
Yes the mother (In some cases) may have actively chosen to create the fetus to begin with
That Dosent change the argument that they have the power to 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.