Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2009, 02:07 PM   #276
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
It's not "oppression" to tell people that they can't hurt you or take your stuff.

If you're going to equate AC and sharia, then you need to show how Libertarian law is oppressive.
What constituted punishable "harm" is specific to a particular conception of morality.

Libertarian law, for example, is oppressive against people who don't believe a person can morally own land, and thus do not believe it is immoral to "trespass".
Earlier in this thread, someone was suggesting that under AC, it would be appropriate for people to set up automatic weapons to shoot anyone who trespassed onto their property. This seems awfully oppressive to me.
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:11 PM   #277
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Libertarian law, for example, is oppressive against people who don't believe a person can morally own land, and thus do not believe it is immoral to "trespass".
oppressive:

1. burdensome, unjustly harsh, or tyrannical: an oppressive king; oppressive laws.
2. causing discomfort by being excessive, intense, elaborate, etc.: oppressive heat.
3. distressing or grievous: oppressive sorrows.

Preventing people from coming on to your property is none of those things. If I believe you're doing something immoral, you're not oppressing me. By that logic, gay people are oppressing Fundamentalist Christians.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:14 PM   #278
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
oppressive:

1. burdensome, unjustly harsh, or tyrannical: an oppressive king; oppressive laws.
2. causing discomfort by being excessive, intense, elaborate, etc.: oppressive heat.
3. distressing or grievous: oppressive sorrows.

Preventing people from coming on to your property is none of those things. If I believe you're doing something immoral, you're not oppressing me. By that logic, gay people are oppressing Fundamentalist Christians.
If I don't believe you actually own the property, how is is not "unjustly harsh" to shoot me if I come onto it?
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:20 PM   #279
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
If I don't believe you actually own the property, how is is not "unjustly harsh" to shoot me if I come onto it?
Except your belief is closer to you don't believe that I should be able to own the property, or that it's wrong that I own the property.

ACers think the government is immoral, but they don't pretend it doesn't exist and have authority.

In order to oppress someone you have to do something TO them. You're subtly shifting the goalposts from your original

Quote:
Libertarian law, for example, is oppressive against people who don't believe a person can morally own land, and thus do not believe it is immoral to "trespass".
To the shoot someone argument. I would say it's wrong to shoot someone for trespassing, but I don't think you can argue it's oppressive under any standard definition of the word
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:27 PM   #280
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
Except your belief is closer to you don't believe that I should be able to own the property, or that it's wrong that I own the property.

ACers think the government is immoral, but they don't pretend it doesn't exist and have authority.

In order to oppress someone you have to do something TO them. You're subtly shifting the goalposts from your original



To the shoot someone argument. I would say it's wrong to shoot someone for trespassing, but I don't think you can argue it's oppressive under any standard definition of the word
You believe the state is immoral, and the state is oppressive if is coerces you as a result of not obeying the state.

I believe that property rights are immoral, and thus anyone who coerces me as a result of not obeying property rights is oppressive.

Property rights are just as oppressive toward someone who does not believe they are legitimate as the state is oppressive toward someone who believes the state is not legitimate.
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:32 PM   #281
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

The government is coercive by nature. Everything it does is coercive, even to people that follow all of its rules.

My owning a piece of property is not coercive to anybody. You are free to choose whether to enter my property or not.

You are perverting the meaning of oppression here.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:39 PM   #282
tubasteve
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tubasteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: f*** city
Posts: 14,291
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
You believe the state is immoral, and the state is oppressive if is coerces you as a result of not obeying the state.

I believe that property rights are immoral, and thus anyone who coerces me as a result of not obeying property rights is oppressive.

Property rights are just as oppressive toward someone who does not believe they are legitimate as the state is oppressive toward someone who believes the state is not legitimate.

If you believe property rights are immoral then you won't mind if I steall all of your **** and move into your house? By definition, an AC society is one that supports AC principles, so not really sure what your point is. In ACland at least the communists will be able to go start up their own little circle-jerk before realizing living like animals/medieval pesants sucks donkey balls.
tubasteve is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:45 PM   #283
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
The government is coercive by nature. Everything it does is coercive, even to people that follow all of its rules.

My owning a piece of property is not coercive to anybody. You are free to choose whether to enter my property or not.

You are perverting the meaning of oppression here.
Yes, your "owning" a piece of property is coercive.
Ownership gives you permission to forcible keep other people from using or entering that property. It gives you moral authority to coerce. That is all that "ownership" means.
If I am standing on a spot of land, which I believe is unowned (because I don't believe land can be owned), and you yell at me "That's my land...get off or I'll shoot you", are you really claiming you are not coercing me??
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:48 PM   #284
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by tubasteve View Post
If you believe property rights are immoral then you won't mind if I steall all of your **** and move into your house? By definition, an AC society is one that supports AC principles, so not really sure what your point is. In ACland at least the communists will be able to go start up their own little circle-jerk before realizing living like animals/medieval pesants sucks donkey balls.
Right, AC is not coercive upon people who believe in the legitimacy of AC, but is coercive upon those who don't believe in it.

Just like the state is only coercive upon those who don't believe in the legitimacy of the state. Or sharia law is only coercive upon those who don't believe in the legitimacy of sharia law.

Maybe the moral system of AC is better than statism or better than sharia, and from utilitarian standpoint, one is a more preferable system.
But all three are coercive. Preferring to statism is just saying that it is morally preferable to coerce some people rather than others.
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:50 PM   #285
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by tubasteve View Post
If you believe property rights are immoral then you won't mind if I steall all of your **** and move into your house? By definition, an AC society is one that supports AC principles, so not really sure what your point is. In ACland at least the communists will be able to go start up their own little circle-jerk before realizing living like animals/medieval pesants sucks donkey balls.
I should also say that someone who doesn't believe in property rights probably wouldn't own a house. But if such a person decided to squat on your land, do you think it would be moral to kick them off? If so, how is this not coercive?
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:51 PM   #286
TomVeil
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomVeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nowhere, Man
Posts: 19,374
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
Right, AC is not coercive upon people who believe in the legitimacy of AC, but is coercive upon those who don't believe in it.

Just like the state is only coercive upon those who don't believe in the legitimacy of the state. Or sharia law is only coercive upon those who don't believe in the legitimacy of sharia law.

Maybe the moral system of AC is better than statism or better than sharia, and from utilitarian standpoint, one is a more preferable system.
But all three are coercive. Preferring to statism is just saying that it is morally preferable to coerce some people rather than others.
The difference is that under AC, you can have any type of government that you and your peers choose.
TomVeil is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:53 PM   #287
tubasteve
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tubasteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: f*** city
Posts: 14,291
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
I should also say that someone who doesn't believe in property rights probably wouldn't own a house. But if such a person decided to squat on your land, do you think it would be moral to kick them off? If so, how is this not coercive?
Yes, because I do believe in property rights. It is coercive but you are the aggressor in this situation, so there isn't really a conflict.
tubasteve is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 02:55 PM   #288
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by tubasteve View Post
Yes, because I do believe in property rights. It is coercive but you are the aggressor in this situation, so there isn't really a conflict.
I am not the "aggressor" if I don't believe in property rights.
You are the aggressor by asserting some sort of right to coerce me in the first place.
From my perspective, how I have done anything coercive or aggressive?
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:06 PM   #289
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post

Just like the state is only coercive upon those who don't believe in the legitimacy of the state.
L



O



L
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:07 PM   #290
tubasteve
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
tubasteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: f*** city
Posts: 14,291
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
I am not the "aggressor" if I don't believe in property rights.
You are the aggressor by asserting some sort of right to coerce me in the first place.
From my perspective, how I have done anything coercive or aggressive?
This isn't any different than not paying my taxes then crying foul when the state comes and locks me up. My complaint might seem legitimate to me, but not to society. So talking about how a communist would fare in AC in a proven AC-zone, when they would actually be ALLOWED to go start a commune and govern it however they want, is just a ridiculous attempt to solve a non-issue.
tubasteve is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:16 PM   #291
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by tubasteve View Post
This isn't any different than not paying my taxes then crying foul when the state comes and locks me up. My complaint might seem legitimate to me, but not to society. So talking about how a communist would fare in AC in a proven AC-zone, when they would actually be ALLOWED to go start a commune and govern it however they want, is just a ridiculous attempt to solve a non-issue.
Right...the state and AC are the same in that they are both coercive upon those who do not believe in a specific system of morality.

I suppose a communist could leave AC society if he felt coerced by property right, but an ACist can leave the state if he feels oppressed by the state. The borders of the state oppress the ACist just like the borders of owned land oppress the communist.
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:19 PM   #292
TomVeil
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomVeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nowhere, Man
Posts: 19,374
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
Right...the state and AC are the same in that they are both coercive upon those who do not believe in a specific system of morality.

I suppose a communist could leave AC society if he felt coerced by property right, but an ACist can leave the state if he feels oppressed by the state. The borders of the state oppress the ACist just like the borders of owned land oppress the communist.
But again, in an AC society, you can start your own commune.
TomVeil is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:21 PM   #293
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
Right...the state and AC are the same in that they are both coercive upon those who do not believe in a specific system of morality.

I suppose a communist could leave AC society if he felt coerced by property right, but an ACist can leave the state if he feels oppressed by the state. The borders of the state oppress the ACist just like the borders of owned land oppress the communist.
How does somebody who doesn't believe in property rights obtain food and shelter other than foraging in the woods and living in caves?
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:29 PM   #294
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubeskies View Post
How does somebody who doesn't believe in property rights obtain food and shelter other than foraging in the woods and living in caves?
How has any nomadic society survived throughout history?
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:32 PM   #295
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomVeil View Post
But again, in an AC society, you can start your own commune.
But you can't start a commune within the boundaries of "property" someone else claims to "own". Just like ACist can't start their society within the boundaries of the state. Both sets of boundaries are only non-coercive to those who already buy into the morality of the society.

If I start a commune on your "property", it is no less coercive for you to say say, "If you don't agree with property rights, you can just leave" than it is for me to say to you "If you don't believe in the state, you can just leave".
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:38 PM   #296
TomVeil
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomVeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nowhere, Man
Posts: 19,374
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
But you can't start a commune within the boundaries of "property" someone else claims to "own". Just like ACist can't start their society within the boundaries of the state. Both sets of boundaries are only non-coercive to those who already buy into the morality of the society.
LOL

I wish you luck on your quest to wander around, own nothing, and come into conflict with everybody who DOES believe in property rights, regardless of what type of society you're dealing with.
TomVeil is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 03:59 PM   #297
NickMPK
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,115
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomVeil View Post
LOL

I wish you luck on your quest to wander around, own nothing, and come into conflict with everybody who DOES believe in property rights, regardless of what type of society you're dealing with.
My guess is that a person who doesn't believe in the legitimacy of natural property rights probably wouldn't do this in an AC society. Instead, they would submit to the dominant morality in their daily life for utilitarian reasons, and just complain about how they were being coerced on internet message boards.
NickMPK is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 04:15 PM   #298
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

It's funny how you started this debate by saying that AC was "oppressive" and then switched to "coercive" when that didn't fly.

You're sliding your definitions of coercion, as well.

In AC, you can only be coerced after taking a positive action - moving on to somebody else's property. Whether you believe property is moral or not, when you live in a society where property rights are paramount, you know that when you move on to property claimed by another, you are risking being "coerced" in to undoing your positive action.

In contrast, in a state, the coercion exists at all times. You need to take a positive action to avoid the coercion (ie, leave).

Do you see the difference? Do you see why one is aggression against a person, and the other is defense? And how the morals of the individual being acted upon have no bearing on the quality of the action?

If you support the state, you are still being coerced. You might feel it's justified, but it is still coercion, because you are taxed at a level decided by the Government, and are forced to abide by the laws they pass, and fund all their activities, regardless of whether you agree with every single one.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 04:16 PM   #299
TomVeil
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TomVeil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nowhere, Man
Posts: 19,374
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK View Post
My guess is that a person who doesn't believe in the legitimacy of natural property rights probably wouldn't do this in an AC society. Instead, they would submit to the dominant morality in their daily life for utilitarian reasons, and just complain about how they were being coerced on internet message boards.
Because they are being coerced into owning a computer and having an internet connection?
TomVeil is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 04:19 PM   #300
NeBlis
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
NeBlis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Just a little southeast of Nome
Posts: 12,039
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by VayaConDios View Post
Yeah, it works by not assigning fault.
NO AINEC it simply doesnt charge you extra money for being at fault. the name is just a marketing gimmick.
NeBlis is offline  

 
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive