Vitamin Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 Why do you feel that courts must involve a monopoly power? Why do you feel that multiple courts issuing contradictory rulings with no clear way to pay for themselves will work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 (edited) Why do you feel that multiple courts issuing contradictory rulings with no clear way to pay for themselves will work? Do you think the current system doesn't involve multiple courts and contradictory rulings? I don't see payment being an issue, since countless businesses operate without resorting to violence. I don't know why having no recourse to aggression would be a problem. Have you ever heard of the Law Merchant? Edited April 29, 2014 by Winchester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vitamin Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 Do you think the current system doesn't contradict? I did actually. Which court has equal authority to the Supreme Court in the USA?I don't see payment being an issue, since countless businesses operate without resorting to violence. I don't know why having no recourse to aggression would be a problem. Have you ever heard of the Law Merchant? Who will pay for it? If I don't have the money for my cable bill, they turn it off. If I don't have the money to pay the Winchester Court(just to use an example) how do I get my justice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 I did actually. Which court has equal authority to the Supreme Court in the USA? Who will pay for it? If I don't have the money for my cable bill, they turn it off. If I don't have the money to pay the Winchester Court(just to use an example) how do I get my justice? Excellent example of a monopoly power abusing authority granted by contract. You're aware that rulings are overruled, right? That's a contradiction, isn't it? Of course, you're only looking at one part of the world. Are you arguing that we should have a one world government, or are you fine with the current existence of multiple courts. Charity, mutual aid organizations, pro bono, contingency, perhaps? I can imagine any number of ways people might handle this. Are you arguing that your concerns justify aggression? Are you in fact making a utilitarian appeal justifying the state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vitamin Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 (edited) Excellent example of a monopoly power abusing authority granted by contract. You're aware that rulings are overruled, right? That's a contradiction, isn't it? Of course, you're only looking at one part of the world. Are you arguing that we should have a one world government, or are you fine with the current existence of multiple courts. Multiple courts exist for multiple societies. Are you denying that there would be multiple courts in a single anarchist society? I fail to see why a single court with the ability to over rule all other courts within a society is a contradiction of anything. Charity, mutual aid organizations, pro bono, contingency, perhaps? I can imagine any number of ways people might handle this. Are you arguing that your concerns justify aggression? Are you in fact making a utilitarian appeal justifying the state?Conservatives have been telling the poor to rely on charity to pay their bills for years. Might as well change it to "floop you" as it gets the same reaction. Edited April 29, 2014 by Vitamin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 Multiple courts exist for multiple societies. Are you denying that there would be multiple courts in a single anarchist society? I fail to see why a single court with the ability to over rule all other courts within a society is a contradiction of anything. Conservatives have been telling the poor to rely on charity to pay their bills for years. Might as well change it to "floop you" as it gets the same reaction What do you see as the purpose of courts? I see it as a means of settling disputes. Sometimes these disputes involve torts, sometimes they're merely a business matter. I thus see no problem with there being more than one third party that people seek out to settle their disputes. This actually already occurs. Do you believe that supreme court decisions can never be overturned? I personally know lawyers who work pro bono cases. Do you know what "contingency" means in reference to hiring a lawyer? Do you know what a mutual aid society is? Currently, what happens if someone doesn't have the money to prove property confiscated through civil asset forfeiture is innocent? There's no hurry on answering this. I just want you to educate yourself on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 The words I say have special meanings that only I know of. That is literally the #1 PM fallback. The idea that institutions would exist in an anarchic society is fairly constant in the anarchist literature going back at Lear to the 19th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now