Let's do a comparison. Take that speech to North Korea, have that conversation with Kim Jong Un, and see what happens.
I'm guessing firing squad.
You love to cite the "force" the government will bring against you. Which amounts to a penalty, then wage garnishment, then property seizure. Literally the worst case scenario is jail time. A firing squad is not on the list.
Negan, would have your legs broken for the first offense and simply beat you to death as an example for the second offense. Correct? (Not actually a walking dead fan.)
" and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.”"
The powers of our elected representatives are not "always to be" nor are they absolute. The attitude that your voices have little effect is exactly what gives them more power than they should have. We'd have had legal marijuana decades ago if people like you voted against every politician who made it illegal!
George Carlin also had a great take on voting that I wanted to share:
I know anarchism seems crazy to a lot of people. And this site is like half full of them now, it seems. But if you're curious as to how I got thinking this way, this is how I became an anarchist:
https://steemit.com/anarchism/@derekareith/how-i-became-an-anarchist
Only half full? ;)
Seriously though, I appreciate this exchange we had. You're the first person who has actually voiced their disagreement with me in the month plus I have been on here. I was getting a little afraid it was becoming an anarchist circle jerk.
Since we will both be on this site for years to come, we will see if we can find more common ground in the future. Just realize, I am not your enemy. I too want a more efficient and peaceful world, without war, corruption, and the perpetual misallocation of resources. Take care! :D
" I was getting a little afraid it was becoming an anarchist circle jerk."
I think it is unfortunately. I've seen one other guy post some really well written "statist" stuff but I haven't seen him post in a week or so. Then again I haven't posted anything meaningful in over a week either but I still intend to.
Ah, here he is saying why he stopped: https://steemit.com/steemit/@satire/i-ll-stop-with-the-anarchist-debunking-posts
Note the first commenter directly stated that a case against anarchy is a case for slavery. :P
I agree that there are different levels of force. I'm not disputing that. Some governments are more harsh than others, in the same way that some slave owners were more harsh to their slaves than others. Some slaves got more food. Some got more beatings. They were all still slaves regardless of how "nice" their owner was.
I'm going to have to disagree on this one. If some men in uniform showed up because I had protested paying taxes for the drug war on moral grounds, and I chose to defend myself from their caging of me, would they not use lethal force? Of course I could submit, and obey their authority over me instead. But wouldn't that authority be "absolute and irresponsible" if it involved the threat of killing me because I was not willing to fund the drug war and willing to protect myself from the gang trying to fund it? Yea, pretty much. But it's more about connecting the fundamentals of extortion, mismanagement, and waste, like we see in governments. Well statistically your individual vote means nothing. It's basically the equivalent to a grain of sand on the beach. And you say that we could have voted against every politician who would make it illegal? OK. But how can you guarantee that the politician that said they would make it legal will keep their word? It's an unbinding agreement with the voters, and in almost 100 years on a national level, this has never come close to passing since drug prohibition began.I'll also add that I am not opposed to people working within the State's playbook to shrink it and/or make it less harmful. I just see it as an unproductive waste of time to beg someone who says they will make X part of my life more free and "promises" they won't change their minds, especially taking into consideration the statistical odds of my vote actually having an impact.
It's a matter of opinion until either one of us starts actually changing things. It's my opinion that we should encourage each other to do whatever we can to get to a more free, peaceful world, even if we disagree on techniques. That being said, if others feel differently, then I won't slow them down. @ftlian is running for governor of NH. He's an anarchist who wants to create change through the political process. That's great! The more roads to freedom the better.
I'd just be careful assuming all anarchists are the same. Most of us are quite different and/or in different stages of understanding the concepts. I admit, when I first started getting into anarchism I was one of the people shouting that war=murder, taxes=theft, laws=slavery. I've come to find over time that those tactics don't work. The conclusions are too abrasive to people most of the time, and it doesn't convey the thought that led to those conclusions.
I found that acting that way turned far more people off to my ideas than on to them. That's why I love @sterlinluxan. He, among others, help show why communication is so important. Anarchists really do have amazing ideas. I mean we wouldn't be here if it weren't for @dan, who is an anarchist looking to enact those ideas into society.
The key thing to remember is that none of us were anarchists by default by the time we heard and understood these concepts. We were all statists, resistant to the ideas, because they went directly against everything we were taught. We need to emphasize empathy and foster the curiosity in others, so that they take the leap themselves, if they so choose. By being pushy, or calling people names, or using hyperbolic expressions, we do ourselves no good, and just end up talking past one another.