What if we are wrong?

[One two three]

What if people really do need to be centrally managed and controlled? What if all human kind is not ready for true liberty? What if I'm wrong about the philosophy of libertarianism or voluntaryism? If I were wrong on a practical level but not a moral one, would I still promote liberty? Would you?

You have a good point.  Unfortunately, there isn't really a super free place right now.  However, there is a super unfree place.  I recommend visiting North Korea and making notes.  Maybe write a best selling book about how NK rocks.

[TimeLady Victorious]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

[NotYourSlave]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

and what do we have now?

[TimeLady Victorious]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

and what do we have now?

Not feudalism, unless you can show me the law on American books that tell me the differences between a slave, a serf, a villein, a freeman, a priest, a count, a duke, an earl, and a king.

[NotYourSlave]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

and what do we have now?

Not feudalism, unless you can show me the law on American books that tell me the differences between a slave, a serf, a villein, a freeman, a priest, a count, a duke, an earl, and a king.

are you implying that we're not slaves now?

[TimeLady Victorious]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

and what do we have now?

Not feudalism, unless you can show me the law on American books that tell me the differences between a slave, a serf, a villein, a freeman, a priest, a count, a duke, an earl, and a king.

are you implying that we're not slaves now?

Yes, unless you can specifically point out the law that says that "such-and-such" is a slave.

Also please point out the local slave auctions. I might need to buy a big buck to keep around the house to fix things, as well as a svelte octoroon to keep for lovin'.

[davann]

I'd have to agree that the vast majority of the world's population are slaves. It is just a kinder and gentler form then the previous versions. In fact, Western society slaves are over all happy and content. Which is why they should be left alone and not bothered with libertarianism.

Which person would you like to be?

A. Happy to go about life consuming things like TVs, fancy cars, sports and McMansions while blissfully unaware or unconcerned the government is holding the chains of captivity that are wrapped around your neck.

B. A pissed off libertarian that knows full well the weight of those chains while also completely aware there ain't shit you can do about it.

I say leave 'em alone. We all can be pissed enough for 'em. No need to ruin their day.

[Rillion]

I'd have to agree that the vast majority of the world's population are slaves. It is just a kinder and gentler form then the previous versions. In fact, Western society slaves are over all happy and content. Which is why they should be left alone and not bothered with libertarianism.

Which person would you like to be?

A. Happy to go about life consuming things like TVs, fancy cars, sports and McMansions while blissfully unaware or unconcerned the government is holding the chains of captivity that are wrapped around your neck.

B. A pissed off libertarian that knows full well the weight of those chains while also completely aware there ain't shit you can do about it.

I say leave 'em alone. We all can be pissed enough for 'em. No need to ruin their day.

But if they stay complacent, and we stay pissed off, then nothing will ever change. 

I also see no conflict between being an enthusiastic consumer and a political advocate at the same time. 

[davann]

I'd have to agree that the vast majority of the world's population are slaves. It is just a kinder and gentler form then the previous versions. In fact, Western society slaves are over all happy and content. Which is why they should be left alone and not bothered with libertarianism.

Which person would you like to be?

A. Happy to go about life consuming things like TVs, fancy cars, sports and McMansions while blissfully unaware or unconcerned the government is holding the chains of captivity that are wrapped around your neck.

B. A pissed off libertarian that knows full well the weight of those chains while also completely aware there ain't shit you can do about it.

I say leave 'em alone. We all can be pissed enough for 'em. No need to ruin their day.

But if they stay complacent, and we stay pissed off, then nothing will ever change. 

I also see no conflict between being an enthusiastic consumer and a political advocate at the same time. 

I was only using consumerism as the current popular example of how “they” have different priorities. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. My point is, if that is what makes them happy maybe that is all okay. I mean we all strive to be happy in life. Libertarians are never going be the good guys when they go around fucking up people’s day by shoving foreign radical ideas at them.

Political advocacy just pisses people off, them and us. It is sort of universal. Libertarians could take the first step and end the cycle of advocacy.

[Rillion]

I was only using consumerism as the current popular example of how “they” have different priorities. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. My point is, if that is what makes them happy maybe that is all okay. I mean we all strive to be happy in life. Libertarians are never going be the good guys when they go around fucking up people’s day by shoving foreign radical ideas at them.

Political advocacy just pisses people off, them and us. It is sort of universal. Libertarians could take the first step and end the cycle of advocacy.

In other words, if they stop taking their own principles seriously and treat politics as if it were a hobby rather than literally a matter of people being free or not.  Which it is, regardless of how many people would be happier without realizing that.

Basically, you're advocating that we shut up about injustice in order to avoid causing people to become uncomfortable.  No thanks. 

[Diogenes The Cynic]

Right now people are idiots. They need a central authority. It is wrong on the practical and moral level. Stop trying to spread it and just live and let live. Maybe some day they will kind enough to follow the example. Don't get your hopes up because they are idiots.

Why do people need a central authority?

The central authority has domesticated them. To push liberty on them is like dropping off your de-clawed and neutered cat in the woods.

of course, that's what the state wants you to think, isn't it?

What is it exactly that you are afraid of?  Do markets respond better when regulations and taxes are removed?

They do, but there is a transition phase. Look at post Soviet Russia.

[davann]

I was only using consumerism as the current popular example of how “they” have different priorities. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. My point is, if that is what makes them happy maybe that is all okay. I mean we all strive to be happy in life. Libertarians are never going be the good guys when they go around fucking up people’s day by shoving foreign radical ideas at them.

Political advocacy just pisses people off, them and us. It is sort of universal. Libertarians could take the first step and end the cycle of advocacy.

In other words, if they stop taking their own principles seriously and treat politics as if it were a hobby rather than literally a matter of people being free or not.  Which it is, regardless of how many people would be happier without realizing that.

Basically, you're advocating that we shut up about injustice in order to avoid causing people to become uncomfortable.  No thanks. 

Thats cool, the high road ain't for everyone.

[NotYourSlave]

And after a while the voluntary agreements will turn into force.

That's how feudalism started.

and what do we have now?

Not feudalism, unless you can show me the law on American books that tell me the differences between a slave, a serf, a villein, a freeman, a priest, a count, a duke, an earl, and a king.

are you implying that we're not slaves now?

Yes, unless you can specifically point out the law that says that "such-and-such" is a slave.

Also please point out the local slave auctions. I might need to buy a big buck to keep around the house to fix things, as well as a svelte octoroon to keep for lovin'.

ifi don't pay my taxes what happens to me?  I'm clearly a slave.

[Rillion]

I was only using consumerism as the current popular example of how “they” have different priorities. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. My point is, if that is what makes them happy maybe that is all okay. I mean we all strive to be happy in life. Libertarians are never going be the good guys when they go around fucking up people’s day by shoving foreign radical ideas at them.

Political advocacy just pisses people off, them and us. It is sort of universal. Libertarians could take the first step and end the cycle of advocacy.

In other words, if they stop taking their own principles seriously and treat politics as if it were a hobby rather than literally a matter of people being free or not.  Which it is, regardless of how many people would be happier without realizing that.

Basically, you're advocating that we shut up about injustice in order to avoid causing people to become uncomfortable.  No thanks. 

Thats cool, the high road ain't for everyone.

If you can explain how being apathetic and ineffectual constitutes the "high road," have at it.  

[Harry Tuttle]

There weren't any regulations in place during the Gilded Age, and factories were hellholes.

Also, this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_beef_scandal

The US Army beef scandal shows that the US Federal government did a poor job of negotiating food for its "employees". You should note that they are and were a monopoly.

Remember that the "helllhole" factories were inundated with people looking for opportunities. They might have felt that the opportunity to work in that factory was better than the alternatives. Nobody was physically forced to work in those "hellholes". They were free to seek better opportunities elsewhere.

Further, "weren't any regulations" is false. Because of government intervention in industries, there were limits to competition that would otherwise have produced more alternatives.