And you have some ability to enforce your will upon the government. In the other model, the feudal model, you are a serf, who has none. Enjoy!
“Surrender”? “Pledge of fealty”? Let’s do the Libertarians the courtesy of expressing this in their diction.
The serf (who may have been a Freeman on the Land before he got tired of armed warriors trying to kill him and raping his wife) Freely entered into a Sacred Contract with the warrior-lord in return for Considerations received. The Consideration included the Right and Liberty to reside on the Property for which the warrior-lord held the Sacred Right of Ownership. That peasant and lord have the Liberty to make such a Contract is as elegant as the mating rituals of Nature’s loveliest songbirds.
It is the modern state which abrogates Freedom, by limiting the Right of people to create such Sacred Contracts, or voiding such Contracts (at gunpoint) when they’ve arisen.
If your contribution to society, I.e. your work for the private sector, outweighs your work from the government, I don’t see a reason to bother you too much. The government is so pervasive in everyday life, that nearly everyone will contribute to its missions at one point or another.
There are many threads in which posters are held accountable for their actions in real life. Both posters obviously work for the government, if they are uncomfortable being criticized on those grounds they should keep that aspect of their identity unknown. Then they can be free to defend their livelihoods and pretend they have no personal stake in the issue. As it is, there is clearly evidence of a bias.
So your objection to iiandyiiii is unrelated to whether his government work increases or decreases humanity’s woes. You just think anyone who works for the government is biased in a discussion of political theory. Got it. (Drat! I get much of my information on political or world developments by reading memoirs of political leaders. I guess I should discard these and use private sources (a Murdoch news network?), though certainly not PBS which gets some of its funding via money extracted at gunpoint(*).)
I’m left puzzled that you bothered to click and addressed that point, rather than the more interesting fact that your Hyperlibertopia is most akin, among real or conjectured political systems which rational thinkers are aware of, to Feudalism. I guess you agree then, that feudal Europe was Utopia before national governments began extracting money (at gunpoint) to develop police forces, etc.
-
- Protip: for WillFarnaby. While I personally enjoy that fact that you can’t mention government taxes without mentioning a “threat of violence” or “at gunpoint” that teh Evil uses to extract teh taxes, I do doubt that this nervous tic enhances your overall credibilty.
Oh wise one, will you teach me the Internet ways of being universally regarded as a pill to everyone around you, yet being so assured of your own lack of bias?
Slavery was ended by people blathering on message boards?
Gosh, and here I figured the pivotal event was the capture of Vicksburg. I didn’t know Ulysses S. Grant was a radical laissez-faire libertarian. I don’t remember reading about that in his Memoirs.
Pure poetry! Beautiful! My hat is off to you!
re RickJay: The citizenry of Atlanta were convinced, by appeal to reason and first principles, to burn their city because it was so largely constructed by slave labor.
C’mon, man, the abolitionist community was filled with anarchocapitalists! WillFarnaby can name five such luminaries without breaking a sweat!
Readysetgo