Punk rockers/anarchists and Libertarians, what is the difference?

[Endus]

It's your lie, and it's your straw man. I stated many, many times that I'm not going to entertain your bullshit.

It's neither.

You stated a universal maxim; that use of government force is "bad", and that's why taxation is "bad"; it requires use of government force. That's it, that was your whole argument on that point.

If you believe that government force is "bad", you must logically oppose all rule of law. Since any law requires use of government force in its enforcement. Otherwise, it's just toothless suggestions anyone can ignore without consequence.

If you don't oppose rule of law, then you don't actually believe that use of government force is, itself, "bad", and thus you can't use that as the basis of your hostility to taxation.

It was a simple dichotomy; either you accept that rule of law exists and therefore that the use of force by the government is defensible and not inherently bad. Or you think that use of government force is bad, and that's why taxation is bad; because it requires the use of government force.

Those two positions are directly contradictory. You cannot rationally believe both to be true.

If you don't want to see my posts, put me on ignore and we can let the audience decide who's right. You keep responding, though, which indicates you want to bully me into going away, and that's just not gonna happen.

[Machismo]

It's neither.

You stated a universal maxim; that use of government force is "bad", and that's why taxation is "bad"; it requires use of government force. That's it, that was your whole argument on that point.

If you believe that government force is "bad", you must logically oppose all rule of law. Since any law requires use of government force in its enforcement. Otherwise, it's just toothless suggestions anyone can ignore without consequence.

If you don't oppose rule of law, then you don't actually believe that use of government force is, itself, "bad", and thus you can't use that as the basis of your hostility to taxation.

It was a simple dichotomy; either you accept that rule of law exists and therefore that the use of force by the government is defensible and not inherently bad. Or you think that use of government force is bad, and that's why taxation is bad; because it requires the use of government force.

Those two positions are directly contradictory. You cannot rationally believe both to be true.

Nope, that leading question was an attempt to push the lie. You are pushing your own straw man, and claiming its me.

When you start with a lie, there's no reason to continue.

By stating that I support the existence of government, states that I accept the use of some form of force is justified. I simply want far less than you do.

[Endus]

Nope, that leading question was an attempt to push the lie. You are pushing your own straw man, and claiming its me.

When you start with a lie, there's no reason to continue.

You haven't demonstrated there was any "lie". Nor was there any "leading question". You're just gaslighting, at this point. You can't even point to where I'm getting anything wrong.

[Glorious Leader]

So, you're against rule of law in all things, then?

Because law cannot be enforced outside of the use of "government force".

If you do agree that rule of law should exist, then you acknowledge the government has a mandate to use force on the behalf of the citizenry, and your entire house of cards on this point collapses.

Or you don't, in which case you're agreeing that anyone should be able to just walk into your house, kill you and your family, and take up residence, and that's cool, no worries brah.

Edit: For clarity, what you are doing is stating a universal maxim ("Government force is bad"), and decrying taxation solely on the basis that it violates that principle.

If that argument works for taxation, it works for rule of law, all of it, even down to the simple ones like rape, murder, and robbery. You'd have to oppose such laws, because they require the use of government force, and, as above, "government force is bad".

The moment you acknowledge that some government force is acceptable, you can't keep trying to make use of the "government force is bad" maxim; you've admitted that maxim is wrong, in your own views. You would have to specify why any particular use of force is "bad", on its own merits and within context, and without trying to fall back on a maxim you don't actually believe to be true, because doing so would be blatant dishonesty.

Most importantly it also applies to PROPERTY. Without taxation their is no property

[Shadowferal]

Like I said, libertarians love those buzzwords; liberty...freedom. They don't mean shit. They're just the sweetener for poison they prattle knowing all the while they have nothing in history that makes them look good.

[Machismo]

I don’t support theft any more than you do by supporting having governance. I also don’t support punishing people anymore than you do. It’s so weird how you throw these “insults” at others when they so accurately describe you. Any actual response or are you just going to pretend to be holier than thou? Is that the point of your political stance since you know no policies will ever come of your staunch Libertarianism?

You had 1 example from 30 years ago to counter modern social democracy...

Yes you do. Remember, you claimed In a socialist and an anarchist. I'm having a hard time keeping up with the current lie.

We have plenty of current examples, like all the assholes screaming to "eat the rich."

[Machismo]

Like I said, libertarians love those buzzwords; liberty...freedom. They don't mean shit. They're just the sweetener for poison they prattle knowing all the while they have nothing in history that makes them look good.

No, freedom doesn't mean shit to you. It does mean something to a few of us.

[Endus]

We have plenty of current examples, like all the assholes screaming to "eat the rich."

Are you under the impression that the slogan has anything to do with cannibalism?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich_(slogan)

It's been a political slogan for better than two centuries.

[Machismo]

Yeah, you’re incredibly inconsistent in what you believe. It’s hard to nail down since you refuse to state it clearly no matter how many times you’re asked. And when hypocrisy is highlighted you pretend you can’t read. Fun times.

Nope, I've been very consistent...

I've made it clear that people should be free to do whatever they want, so long as they are not harming others.

Somehow, that makes me a socialist and an anarchist.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you under the impression that the slogan has anything to do with cannibalism?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_the_rich_(slogan)

It's been a political slogan for better than two centuries.

Yep, and its still being used.

Why do people hate the wealthy so fucking much?

[Endus]

Yep, and its still being used.

Why do people hate the wealthy so fucking much?

Because they're directly responsible for the wealth inequality that leads to people going hungry or without necessary medical care. Which literally gets people killed.

This is not an explanation that should come as any kind of surprise, because it's been exactly why that phrase has been used for those centuries of activism.

[Machismo]

Yep, and I’ve pointed out where that falls short multiple times when it comes to your more in depth stances. You just shrug and say, “but rich people!”

It falls short in your eyes, because you don't give a shit about liberty, and you want to punish wealthy people to pay for all the shot you want.

- - - Updated - - -

Because they're directly responsible for the wealth inequality that leads to people going hungry or without necessary medical care. Which literally gets people killed.

This is not an explanation that should come as any kind of surprise, because it's been exactly why that phrase has been used for those centuries of activism.

So... thanks for agreeing it is still current!

[Shadowferal]

No, freedom doesn't mean shit to you. It does mean something to a few of us.

No it doesn't.
You were born and raised in a country already filled with infrastructure, law and order, public education, clean environment...everything that you long took full advantage of to get ahead in life.
Anti-tax people are nothing but freeloaders. Go to the south Sudan if you don't want to contribute. But bring an army. Because there won't be anyone to protect you.

[Endus]

So... thanks for agreeing it is still current!

Where did I suggest it wasn't?

As long as wealth inequality is attenuated to such a degree that the working poor suffer hardship, that slogan will retain meaning and value.

[Machismo]

No it doesn't.
You were born and raised in a country already filled with infrastructure, law and order, public education, clean environment...everything that you long took full advantage of to get ahead in life.
Anti-tax people are nothing but freeloaders. Go to the south Sudan if you don't want to contribute. But bring an army. Because there won't be anyone to protect you.

So, you're mocking me for supporting liberty, then claiming I don't support liberty.

Nice one.

- - - Updated - - -

Where did I suggest it wasn't?

As long as wealth inequality is attenuated to such a degree that the working poor suffer hardship, that slogan will retain meaning and value.

Yes, thanks for helping me to show the other poster that such attempts are still going on.

[Glorious Leader]

So, you're mocking me for supporting liberty, then claiming I don't support liberty.

Nice one.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, thanks for helping me to show the other poster that such attempts are still going on.

You support the most incredible narrow and arbitrary definition of liberty that is in actuality crushing for most people. What you actually support is privelege.

[Endus]

Yes, thanks for helping me to show the other poster that such attempts are still going on.

What "attempts"? Do you still think the slogan has anything to do with cannibalism?

[Machismo]

Look, I'm on a lot of medication currently and my memory sucks. Can you answer a few questions? I want to figure out how much governance you support.

As far as public funding goes, should we have police? Firefighters? Obviously we have to have some kind of tax collection infrastructure to fund the government itself. Who decides who owns what property? I have more questions, but let's start there.

That has been covered.

People should be free to do whatever they want, so long as they are not harming others. The role of government should be to restrict/punish only those actions.

Maybe you should come back when you aren't on so many medications.

- - - Updated - - -

What "attempts"? Do you still think the slogan has anything to do with cannibalism?

Nope, you seem to keep missing with that one.

[Endus]

Nope, you seem to keep missing with that one.

So you're just not gonna explain what you meant, then.

This is why people say you're gaslighting. You refuse to provide specifics for anything, and resort to personal abuse when challenged.

[Machismo]

You support the most incredible narrow and arbitrary definition of liberty that is in actuality crushing for most people. What you actually support is privelege.

Nope, I support individual liberty.

Considering you called gor nationalizing websites,your opinion on liberty means very little.

- - - Updated - - -

So you're just not gonna explain what you meant, then.

This is why people say you're gaslighting. You refuse to provide specifics for anything, and resort to personal abuse when challenged.

We were discussing the push for socialism...

Specifically, we were discussing attempts to stifle liberty in the name of socialism.

[Glorious Leader]

Nope, I support individual liberty.

Considering you called gor nationalizing websites,your opinion on liberty means very little.

Websites aren't individuals they can't have liberty. Corporations aren't people they can't have liberty.
You don't give a fucking shit about the people who are employed by those institutions. You can't argue against measures that would increase their standard of living but then pretend like you support them. Its bullshit and nobody buys it except you.

I dont have an opinion other than whatever you believe is not liberty. You support privilege plain and fucking simple.