Recent content by SkepticalMetal

You're responding to FreedomFanatic. That wasn't originally posted by me.

...Not pacifism, dude. But no, I agree with you, this debate is pointless. Already I can see it's going straight into bland condescension. Oh well, people can do what they want. I'm pretty tired of repeating myself anyway.

Funny, I got the exact same response when I was debating people on gun control on another forum.

The bottom line for me is that you need a culture of freedom for either anarchism or minarchism to work. In anarchism you MIGHT get rid of the state but then people will still find other methods of using violence against innocent people. I also think an anarchist system would be VERY easy...

No. If anything, you just described your own view. I've said this several times now - that if your ultimate goal is a political revolution then you are simply doing what numerous others have done before you. Perhaps they win their revolution (and they usually do). Okay, so what happens? They...

Anyway to your last point its not a matter of ethics its a matter of power. Even if everyone somehow came to accept these libertarian or anarcho capitalist ethics, which is optimistic in and of itself, that wouldnt mean anything would change or states would disapear. The powers at be wont be...

My own way of going about things is talking to people about the evils of statism, and convincing them of the Rothbardian anarchist position. If you wish to demonstrate your freedom to carry a weapon openly even with thugs standing by to deprive you of that then, as I said, I can't stop you, but...

So your admitting now there has never been a stateless society? Werent you the one who claimed there where extensive examples of such earlier. Where did I claim this? As far as I know, the closest thing I ever said to this was that anarcho-capitalism exists in that it doesn't. And I am...

Yeah, and the revolution really got us somewhere, right? This place is right back where it started. Political revolution never has any lasting value - as a believer in non-aggression, if people want to demonstrate their right to bear arms in this manner (despite the fact that it's nothing to...

...No. My argument is that anarcho-capitalism is the one properly consistent libertarian philosophy. My point in saying what you referenced here was to say that if you honestly believe that warlords would take over (which hasn't actually happened seeing as how a stateless society has not yet...

"Most of that can be blamed on the Constitution." Okay, most of what? And a new constitution? First of all, the old one was wrong because it still advocated the "club mentality," which Lysander Spooner pointed out. Walter Block illustrated this when he talked about a man in 1776 who was told by...

First I'd like to start out by quoting DanMuff from the LibertyHQ forums in saying that "anarcho-capitalism exists to the extent that it doesn't." For many anarcho-capitalists who recognize it for what it is (a justice system) it is simply a matter of distinguishing between what is right and...

@OP Yes, the minarchist position is inconsistent, even from a cost-benefit analysis (as David Friedman has pointed out). In order to accomplish what it is going for, minarchism must essentially deny the right of secession (individuals may not secede totally from the grip of government) and, in...

Could you elaborate on why you hold this to be true?

Generally if you're a "left-libertarian" then you're a traditional anarchist (subscribing to the works of Kropotkin, Chomsky, etc.) I think that the confusion really set in when Roderick Long subscribed to the title as well (despite believing in the free market/Austrian economics). This is why I...