[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


A recognized Safe Space for liberty - if you're triggered and you know it, clap your hands!

File: 1455424396966.png (1.04 MB, 612x732, 51:61, Trump.PNG)

 No.17421

Donald Trump is so rich that he can outcompete the two established political parties that have monopolised the government. Every other candidate is fuelled by corporate interests, but Trump is completely private. Trump represents the individual. He is what the entrepreneur can achieve by simply providing people with what they want. He outcompeted everyone in the free market and now he will outcompete everyone in the government.

Trying to beat someone who provides a better service than you? Impossible.

 No.17422

>>17421

We don't want to privatize government. We want to abolish it.


 No.17427

I really doubt he'll win at the GE tbh

If Sanders wins democrat, I predict Sanders as president 2016.


 No.17430

>>17422

>>17427

Does it trigger anyone that the ancap flag is upside down?

Capito-Anarchism?


 No.17431

>>17430

Woah didn't realise that


 No.17433

>>17422

And then privatize it


 No.17551

>>17433

>And then privatize it

Here is the thing. You need a government for a very small set of things

1) "10 commandment enforcement" aka prevent stealing, murdering, bearing false witness, etc. This includes protecting a citizen's liberty in the general sense, both from other citizens and from government. Also includes preventing bad actors from dumping toxic waste in waterways, or polluting the air, poisoning the land, and so forth; and punishing them if they do.

2) National Defense, and other "National" things. Like, you need someone to negotiate with other heads of state for whatever purpose nations negotiate. Etc.

3) Conflict arbitration between local governments, or between industry and citizens or industry and local governments or local governments and citizens.

4) Levy taxes of SOME sort, since 1-3 costs money. In the days of the founding fathers, the only taxes were import tariffs, and voluntary bonds and lotteries.

That's the basics. That's all you need. Now… you can make the argument there are certain kinds of exceptions for example nation-wide infrastructure or services (post office) but these ought to be debated on a case-by-case basis on their merits, and the default should position be it's not the government's job.

So no we should not privatize government. It needs to be a public service. Public. Service. When was the last time government serviced the general public as opposed to Wall Street or multinational corporations or billionaires or lobbyists or special interests? Not in my lifetime.

The Libertarian logic is simply that the larger government is, regardless of the intended or stated purpose, the more it will tax and subjugate the people in order to serve the special interests and friends and cronies of the politicians who pay for their extravagant election campaigns. Rather, government should be modest and constrained and economical and only exert its power to serve genuine public interest.


 No.17555

>>17551

So then privatize the state


 No.17558

>>17551

You do realise none of the things you talked about require government right?

Seriously man it's like you just wandered in off the street

Read moar


 No.17559

>>17558

I guess taxes require government


 No.17561

>>17558

>Read moar

grow up


 No.17564

>>17561

It's a meme ya dip


 No.17581

>>17564

>It's a meme ya dip

Oh, whats the meme?


 No.17584

>>17581

1/4 of this is

>>17561


 No.17587

>>17559

The mafia extract taxes from homes and businesses under their protection. Though personally I consider the mafia to be a form of informal government so I guess you're right.


 No.17590

>>17551

>1) "10 commandment enforcement" aka prevent stealing, murdering, bearing false witness, etc.

DRO's.

>Also includes preventing bad actors from dumping toxic waste in waterways, or polluting the air, poisoning the land, and so forth; and punishing them if they do.

Give everyone suffering from the pollution a compensation claim and then private people can de facto enforce environmental standards.

>2) National Defense,

Militia and PMC's.

>Like, you need someone to negotiate with other heads of state for whatever purpose nations negotiate. Etc.

Debatable.

>3) Conflict arbitration between local governments

Private courts.

>or between industry and citizens

Prvate courts.

>industry and local governments or local governments and citizens.

Private. Courts.


 No.17594

>>17551

The toxic waste thing would be a violation of the NAP AMD I would go poundland Rambo on them


 No.17595

>>17594

*NAP and


 No.17607

>>17590

I think private courts are and private police are such a bad idea. Are you from /leftypol/ doing some false flagging?


 No.17608

>>17607

It's a classic Ancap idea. I'm sorry, but this is what Ancaps really believe.

Personally, I'm fine with private courts so long as I'm in charge of all of them.


 No.17610

>>17608

>Personally, I'm fine with private courts so long as I'm in charge of all of them.

Yeah I know right? We have "functionally" private courts right now. They work for billionaires and corporations and lobbyists, even though they're not supposed to.

But ancaps want to allow them explicitly work for billionaires corporations and lobbyists.

Can you imagine? The Microsoft Police kick down your door and beat you to death for using Linux. Your widow takes them to court (which are all owned by Microsoft) who rules in favor of the Microsoft Police, and then she has to pay a fine for the privilege of using the court system.

ancap paradise.


 No.17613

File: 1455827883665.jpg (26.24 KB, 600x600, 1:1, blank face.jpg)

>>17607

>>17608

Once you two guys are done giving each other wankjobs, can we please go back to the topic?

>>17610

Thanks. Too bad you have no idea how a private court system would work. Or basic economics.

Right now, we do have private courts, and they are pretty damn popular between businesses. Usually, they consist of three judges: Each party elects one judge, these two judges pick a third. There is no legal rule that the judges have to be picked that way, but they are, because this ensures a fair and just trial.

Another approach, suggested by Rothbard, is to regard verdicts as enforcable if they are a) undisputed or b) approved by a second court. This way, even if a court is is blatantly corrupt, you get a second chance to

Obviously, these two approaches can be combined, for maximum justice and fairness.

Also obviously, there's going to be a problem if all the courts are owned by the Strawman Ltd. I have no idea how that should happen, considering all the monopolies I ever heard of were either created by states, or weren't monopolies at all. Even if there was a monopoly on private courts, everyone and his mom could start a new company to compete. Seriously, the startup costs for your own court would be basically zero.

>MICROSOFT!!!!

Relies on patent and IP laws, something most ancaps nowadays reject. They also have to compete against their own products, funny enough.


 No.17615

File: 1455828738751.jpg (59.01 KB, 379x214, 379:214, 1453215485890.jpg)

>>17613

>maximum justice


 No.17619

>>17613

> Too bad you have no idea how a private court system would work.

Okay, well help me understand then because I am a liberty minded individual but I just don't get this.

So I propose a game. I define a hypothetical scenario below, and you respond with the steps the main character takes. Then I respond with questions and what ifs.

—-

Bob is on a business trip to a neighboring city. He asked his neighbor Charlie to keep an eye on things while he was gone. Charlie notices Bob's window is smashed, and peeks inside and sees Bob's wife and kids have been murdered. Charlie seeks to invoke some greater authority to investigate and solve the murder.

1) Who does he call?

2) Is Bob required to have purchased some sort of private insurance/contract in order to have police respond at all?

2b) If Bob has not purchased some sort of private insurance/contract with law enforcement, does this mean he has no recourse?


 No.17622

>>17613

Ancap here. Personally I don't think private courts would be much of a thing. Instead, whenever there's a dispute between A and B, each one would seek his own legal service, then A's lawyers would have a meeting with B's lawyers, debate the issue and reach an agreement. If either one is obviously in the wrong, his own lawyer will tell him to admit guilt and minimize damages, as it currently happens. A law firm or lawyer who does otherwise would soon be out of business because his bad advice would be unenforceable due to massive opposition.


 No.17623


 No.17624

>>17610

A random criminal gang has come to attack you?

That's why you have private police

It's not that hard m8.

Crime will never pay in this system. It's gonna be yuge




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]