The Official Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist Thread

#1,251
#1,251
n_huffhines said:
They went into it with a constitution and bill of rights? The constitution didn't come until like 13 years after the war and the bill of rights was after that.

Democracy/republics were totally unproven. Rome had tried it, they turned into an imperialist, authoritative nation, and then they fell.
Click to expand...

The root causes of their demise are basically the same as what ours will be with similar long term results.
 
#1,252
#1,252
hog88 said:
The root causes of their demise are basically the same as what ours will be with similar long term results.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Like they inflated the money supply and spread their military empire across the globe...our empire may look and behave a lot differently, but its crippling cost is the problem.
 
#1,253
#1,253
n_huffhines said:
They went into it with a constitution and bill of rights? The constitution didn't come until like 13 years after the war and the bill of rights was after that.
Click to expand...

They did not start a revolution with no plan in hand. They had the Boston tea party as a statement against English taxation. England passed severe legislation against them, so the colonies started meeting to see what to do, and eventually called the First Continental Congress to discuss it.

The delegates who attended the Congress were not of one mind concerning why they were there. Conservatives, such as Joseph Galloway, John Dickinson, John Jay, and Edward Rutledge, believed their task to be the forging of common policies to pressure Parliament to rescind its unreasonable acts. Their ultimate goal was to develop a reasonable solution to the difficulties and bring about reconciliation between the colonies and Great Britain. Radicals, such as Patrick Henry, Roger Sherman, Samuel Adams, and John Adams, believed their task to be the development of a decisive statement of the rights and liberties of the Colonies. Their ultimate goal was to end the perceived abuses of parliamentary authority, and to retain, in the empire and under the king if possible, the constitutional rights which were claimed on the basis of the colonial charters and the English constitution.[3]

Among the radicals, Sherman denied altogether the legislative authority of Parliament and Henry was of the opinion that the Congress needed to develop a completely new system of governance, independent from Great Britain, for the existing colonial governments were already dissolved.[4] To counter these ideas, Galloway put forward a "Plan of Union", which suggested an American legislative body be formed, with some authority, and whose consent would be required for imperial measures.[4][5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Continental_Congress
Click to expand...

In other words, they showed their dissatisfaction and got together to discuss what to do--initially under the idea that they would remain in the British empire. Some, who would end up driving to secede, used the congress as an opportunity to design what would be formed.

n_huffhines said:
Democracy/republics were totally unproven. Rome had tried it, they turned into an imperialist, authoritative nation, and then they fell.
Click to expand...

They were totally unproven, yet you list the historical proofs they had given.

n_huffhines said:
You don't have to buy into An-Cap, but I think you should join me in advocating an experiment. You have nothing to lose and a lot to gain.
Click to expand...

Oh, I 100% support you moving to some island somewhere. :)
 
#1,255
#1,255
n_huffhines said:
I totally agree. Like they inflated the money supply and spread their military empire across the globe...our empire may look and behave a lot differently, but its crippling cost is the problem.
Click to expand...

Main cause of them transitioning from a republic to a emperor was their citizens laziness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,256
#1,256
n_huffhines said:
Uhhh, one data point is not proof. A contested data point, at that.
Click to expand...

You seriously think that Rome is the only democracy to have existed before the US Constitution? And you think that my point was that the "proof" of that democracy was its inevitable durability?

Ancient Greece, Rome, and even many native American tribes (who some scholars believe had tremendous impact on the founding fathers' designs)...

My point was that the funding fathers had several examples to draw from. Not, "Well, not sure what'll happen, but let's pull the pin anyway..."
 
#1,257
#1,257
Orange_Crush said:
You seriously think that Rome is the only democracy to have existed before the US Constitution? And you think that my point was that the "proof" of that democracy was its inevitable durability?

Ancient Greece, Rome, and even many native American tribes (who some scholars believe had tremendous impact on the founding fathers' designs)...

My point was that the funding fathers had several examples to draw from. Not, "Well, not sure what'll happen, but let's pull the pin anyway..."
Click to expand...

OK, say all that is dead on, somebody at some point still had to try an unproven system...
 
#1,258
#1,258
n_huffhines said:
OK, say all that is dead on, somebody at some point still had to try an unproven system...
Click to expand...

Amazing how your arguments in defense of ANCAP seem to always slide back to more questions than answers, isn't it?

"We don't know what will happen, but let's do it..."

"Let's do it because at some time, someone surely had to try some thing that had never been tried before..."

Greece, what most historians consider to be the birthplace of democracy as we know it, was a collection of warring city-states, ruled by 'warlords'. Due to the imbalance of power, Athens evolved toward a democracy, and many of the city-states began to follow.

So, as has been noted already in this thread, the greatest probability in anarchy is that you will find warring city-states and warlords that take advantage of power vacuums and implement their rule.

Democracy evolved to free people from the state of rule that ancap would most likely move towards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,259
#1,259
Orange_Crush said:
Amazing how your arguments in defense of ANCAP seem to always slide back to more questions than answers, isn't it?

"We don't know what will happen, but let's do it..."

"Let's do it because at some time, someone surely had to try some thing that had never been tried before..."

Greece, what most historians consider to be the birthplace of democracy as we know it, was a collection of warring city-states, ruled by 'warlords'. Due to the imbalance of power, Athens evolved toward a democracy, and many of the city-states began to follow.

So, as has been noted already in this thread, the greatest probability in anarchy is that you will find warring city-states and warlords that take advantage of power vacuums and implement their rule.

Democracy evolved to free people from the state of rule that ancap would most likely move towards.
Click to expand...

Why is that amazing? It would be irresponsible and stupid to guarantee it will work better than our current system. Of course i say i don't know for sure. Just like it would be irresponsible to guarantee government is a superior solution.

Let's just try an experiment and then you don't have to be obsessed with my level of certainty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,260
#1,260
n_huffhines said:
Your unmitigated faith in government is an affront to reality.
Click to expand...

Now THAT's out of left field. Whatever gave you the idea I have unmitigated faith in government? Any form government. When, in fact I have very, very little. And ANCAP (which true anarchists will tell you is close to buffoonery) is among the least...

You are allowed to use communist russia to argue against an-cap, it's just an argument that completely backfires.
Click to expand...

You know, ... I am sorry. I gave you too much credit.
I had begun to believe your ability to comprehend was that of a middle-schooler.
Come ... take ODR's hand and walk with me to the swings and I'll push you while I couch my point for Romper Room.

1. I don't care about how Russian mayors think. (School teachers for grownups argue about it. Some call it democratic socialism, others call it transitional socialism -big words, I know)

Anyway, how the mayors think in that big ol' country Russia? What the mayors and big wigs who ran things think don't matter. It's what they did.

What they think is not part of what I'm saying..don't care) It just was they thought when everything there "collapsed". You know, ... fell down. Came apart. Big time. Here's the story.

2. So there was this big place, Russia, where there were mayors and other big wigs that tried to make it so people had enough things they need like food, a cottage, stuff to wear, firewood, you know things like that, maybe a radio or TV.

2. Well, those mayors, too many of them liked big cottages with lots of rooms and a TV and radio in each room and they took stuff from the people so the mayors had it and the people had none. That's called being crooked.

3. Well, I tell you! That couldn't go on! The people got mad and got rid of those crooked mayors.

Now...here might be the hard and hurtful part for you to understand. Try hard.

4. Well this big place, Russia, got rid of the crooked mayors who were stealing.

5. (I want you to look up this word in your dictionary-"collapse")

WORSE than the crooked mayors came. Badder crooks that wanted really big palaces instead of really big cottages just started telling the people how things will be and taking their stuff.

This happened during and just after the first crooked mayors were run off. So, it was during the "collapse", before the people could get better mayors than the last bad ones.

6. So the really bad crooks started taking most of the food, and clothing, and stuff to build cottages, and TV's and radios for themselves and selling them for crazy amounts of money. So now the bad crooks could build their palaces.

7. Even though it took a long time, things eventually got only a little better for the people. But it's still really bad compared to what it should be. All because of those really bad crooks who started taking things during the "collapse".

I dunno. I'm writing and editing this on my cell phone. If I've mis-speled a word or two, I hope you can still understand. If not...

Anyway you ANCAP Sunshine Pumper you, made my case, so as you like to say, You can't use my Romper Room analogy, I win...and I really am done with the thread now. So much better stuff of the dimensions of politics on all the web than is brought to the table here.
 
Last edited:
#1,262
#1,262
n_huffhines said:
Why is that amazing? It would be irresponsible and stupid to guarantee it will work better than our current system. Of course i say i don't know for sure. Just like it would be irresponsible to guarantee government is a superior solution.

Let's just try an experiment and then you don't have to be obsessed with my level of certainty.
Click to expand...

I've already stated that I'm all for your experiment. Raise the $$$ and sign your citizenship away.

And I'm not obsessed with your level of certainty. I'm trying to tell you that it'll take more than your current uncertainty to woo the masses to your side.

(And your uncertainty makes your 'statist' mockery look pretty ridiculous. Sign your citizenship away, go prove your point, and then mock everyone. Until then, your argument and condescension makes you look like an idiot.)
 
#1,263
#1,263
n_huffhines said:
Why is that amazing? It would be irresponsible and stupid to guarantee it will work better than our current system. Of course i say i don't know for sure. Just like it would be irresponsible to guarantee government is a superior solution.

Let's just try an experiment and then you don't have to be obsessed with my level of certainty.
Click to expand...

Oh hell no. We ain't gonna experiment on that scale with the wellfare of 377,000,000 souls!!!
 
#1,264
#1,264
Orangedogsrule said:
Oh hell no. We ain't gonna experiment on that scale with the wellfare of 377,000,000 souls!!!
Click to expand...

All he's wanting is an island. Seriously. I think it would be a great idea, though I'm not sure it would make the argument he'd need it to.

(a) Where did they raise enough money to buy an island? In the evil, statist state that is intent on holding them down.

(b) How many people will they find to move there and start from scratch? Enough to scale up to US population, resources and needs?
 
#1,267
#1,267
Orange_Crush said:
I've already stated that I'm all for your experiment. Raise the $$$ and sign your citizenship away.

And I'm not obsessed with your level of certainty. I'm trying to tell you that it'll take more than your current uncertainty to woo the masses to your side.

(And your uncertainty makes your 'statist' mockery look pretty ridiculous. Sign your citizenship away, go prove your point, and then mock everyone. Until then, your argument and condescension makes you look like an idiot.)
Click to expand...

How about $17T in debt that will inevitably lead to financial failure? That's kinda what I'm waiting on.
 
#1,270
#1,270
n_huffhines said:
How about $17T in debt that will inevitably lead to financial failure? That's kinda what I'm waiting on.
Click to expand...

You are definitely making the case for gov't reform. But going from the broken system we have now to anarchy is like dropping your first date off, skipping the goodnight kiss, and trying to have sex with her on her doorstep.

:hi:
 
#1,271
#1,271
DdWbNTpUwAEpR9y.jpg:large
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top