Laudate_Dominum Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) rotflol EDIT: I hate flipping the page with a reply like this. Edited June 18, 2012 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 It would have been morally acceptable for the occupants to remove the combat from the thugs in government attire. http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/18/ninth-circuit-to-dea-putting-a-gun-to-an Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340042469' post='2445852'] It would have been morally acceptable for the occupants to remove the combat from the thugs in government attire. [url="http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/18/ninth-circuit-to-dea-putting-a-gun-to-an"]http://reason.com/bl...ing-a-gun-to-an[/url] [/quote] Just read that story on cmom's wall. Makes me pist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340043231' post='2445859'] Just read that story on cmom's wall. Makes me pist. [/quote] She scooped me. I cannot permit her to outanarchist me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) If your neighbor lives by himself and has 3 alpacas, can a man go and shave one so he can make a blanket for his baby under the anarchist model? Is the 3 alpaca owner a theif if he doesn't willingly give his neighbor the wool for his baby since he has more than he needs? Is it theft if the 3 alpaca neighbor demands the neighbor to knit 2 blankets from the 3 alpacas so the neighbor can keep 1? Edited June 18, 2012 by Anomaly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1340046813' post='2445904'] If your neighbor lives by himself and has 3 alpacas, can a man go and shave one so he can make a blanket for his baby under the anarchist model? [/quote] Not without permission. From a Catholic perspective, in order to survive, it is acceptable for a person to make use of the property of another, but justice demands compensation. (that's Aquinas). [quote]Is the 3 alpaca owner a theif if he doesn't willingly give his neighbor the wool for his baby since he has more than he needs?[/quote] No. [quote] Is it theft if the 3 alpaca neighbor demands the neighbor to knit 2 blankets from the 3 alpacas so the neighbor can keep 1? [/quote] If he uses coercion, not merely rhetoric, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340047514' post='2445910'] Not without permission. From a Catholic perspective, in order to survive, it is acceptable for a person to make use of the property of another, but justice demands compensation. (that's Aquinas). No. If he uses coercion, not merely rhetoric, yes. [/quote]Define what you consider as coercion. If the alpaca neighbor just doesn't want a blanket and isn't interested in sharing his wool, but wanted two sweaters which the other neighbor doesn't know how to knit, that leaves the father of the baby limited options so he should just shear the wool and be done with it. There has to be property rights where some persons have no option but to work for wages which are a means of efficient trading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Define what you mean by define.hahaha. I troll u. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1340049230' post='2445925'] Define what you mean by define. hahaha. I troll u. [/quote]But, but, but, Winnie was responding... Don't hate the shufflin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1338433542' post='2438361'] You mean like these guys? [img]http://newspaper.li/static/737136b4ee8993af0ee47d4a02d0e697.jpg[/img] [/quote] Yeah, pretty much. Except they'd be accountable to no law and no one other than the boss paying them, who himself would be accountable to no one and no law. Of course, you'll probably say that that's in reality no different from our police forces under the current system. And I'm sure you can give a long list of cases of police corruption and abuse to back it up. However, for all its flaws, imperfections, and abuses, I'd rather live under a system where law enforcement is (at least to some degree) accountable to the people it exists to "serve and protect," rather than accountable only to their immediate employers (who cannot be removed or voted out by any democratic process). And even if you want to argue that all cops are in fact nothing more than mercenary thugs sold to the highest bidder, anarchism would still be nothing more than "meet the new boss, same as the old boss," rather than a glorious improvement. Property rights require a binding rule of law, and the rule of law requires enforcement to be effective. I still have yet to see a credible explanation of how rule of law will be enforced under an anarchic system. You can decry "statism" all day long, but I've yet to see anything to convince me that anarchism will be an improvement. In reality (as born out by history), it would entail lawlessness, and endless blood feuds and wars of vendetta, until eventually one party (due to either superior physical might, ruthlessness, political skill, or some combination of the three) emerges strongest, and becomes a kind of state (likely monarchical). Edited June 18, 2012 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1340051811' post='2445975'] Yeah, pretty much. Except they'd be accountable to no law and no one other than the boss paying them, who himself would be accountable to no one and no law. Of course, you'll probably say that that's in reality no different from our police forces under the current system. And I'm sure you can give a long list of cases of police corruption and abuse to back it up. However, for all its flaws, imperfections, and abuses, I'd rather live under a system where law enforcement is (at least to some degree) accountable to the people it exists to "serve and protect," rather than accountable only to their immediate employers (who cannot be removed or voted out by any democratic process). And even if you want to argue that all cops are in fact nothing more than mercenary thugs sold to the highest bidder, anarchism would still be nothing more than "meet the new boss, same as the old boss," rather than a glorious improvement. Property rights require a binding rule of law, and the rule of law requires enforcement to be effective. I still have yet to see a credible explanation of how rule of law will be enforced under an anarchic system. You can decry "statism" all day long, but I've yet to see anything to convince me that anarchism will be an improvement. In reality (as born out by history), it would entail lawlessness, and endless blood feuds and wars of vendetta, until eventually one party (due to either superior physical might, ruthlessness, political skill, or some combination of the three) emerges strongest, and becomes a kind of state (likely monarchical). [/quote] Normative. Position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 The Doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 http://www.lewrockwell.com/kinsella/kinsella15.html#ref Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1340050317' post='2445948'] But, but, but, Winnie was responding... Don't hate the shufflin'. [/quote] I will break this into parties A, B, and C when I am not drunk, which is a horrible mortal sin, as evidenced by the wedding at Cana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1340062565' post='2446043'] I will break this into parties A, B, and C when I am not drunk, which is a horrible mortal sin, as evidenced by the wedding at Cana. [/quote]I'll take Drunken Response B; FTW. 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