The Free Talk Live BBS
Free Talk Live => General => Topic started by: TheRothbardian on January 20, 2006, 04:58:02 PM
-
Hey guys, I wrote a paper a few months back that I presented at the Austrian Students Scholars Conference 2005 in Pennsylvania. I would like to know what you guys think. I know Ian has been speaking very highly about Anarcho-capitalism thus I wanted to share my analysis. Let me know what you guys think. I am also the cofounder, along with Neal Conner, of the Libertarian Activist Network here at the University of Florida in an effort to rally the libertarian student populace. Here is the link:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=19786682&blogID=47799023
Here is a paper I also did on Ernesto Guevara that appeared in my High School newspaper that turned a lot of commies even redder than they naturally are:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=19786682&blogID=33096143
Sincerely,
Alexander Villacampa
Vice-President of the Libertarian Activist Network University of Florida
-
Both are good.
-
Thank you
-
Good stuff. Reminds me of this one: http://www.lewrockwell.com/long/long11.html
Btw, I'm planning to go to the Austrian Scholar's Conference at the Mises Institute 8)
Should be lots of fun
-
There are grammar errors here and there, but otherwise a solid essay.
The only contradiction I found in the essay was calling aggressive companies "defense" agencies. At the point of aggression and/or attack, it would seem to me that they cease to be a "defensive" entity and simply just a paid aggressor. Defense implies impeding and/or neutralizing an attacker; defense does not imply aggression against someone else. If a company was attacking people, it wouldn't be in the business of defense. I thought I'd just mention that bit.
I think a great example of private defense would be body guards. Why would a body guard initiate force against somebody else, especially someone who is non-violent and unthreatening? Why would a body guard stab you in the back? You pay a body guard to protect you; your well-being is their well-being.
-
I guess the idea there is that force (not "aggression") between agencies would be used as a last resort when trying to defend people or recover property, though I think they would rather settle by court or awarding money damages, since an actual battle would be expensive.
-
Proleterian- it comes under the definition of defense. A defense agency is there to defend you from acts against you and your property and to recover your property if it is ever damaged or stolen. I see nothing wrong with the use of the label "defense agency."
Vanguadist- Awesome! So am I! Are you presenting a paper? I am presenting "On The History of Anarchist Thought."
-
Heh, no, I wish :P
Just an observer. You can email me and maybe we can get together and talk about anarchy :) This will be my first time at Auburn. Looks great.
-
Proleterian- it comes under the definition of defense. A defense agency is there to defend you from acts against you and your property and to recover your property if it is ever damaged or stolen. I see nothing wrong with the use of the label "defense agency."
That's a good point. I meant, they wouldn't be a defense agency in the event that they are arbitrarily attacking peaceful neighbors to acquire property. But I see what you're saying.