Main Page

From Anarchy Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Isn't anarchy chaos?

No, anarchy is not chaos.

An (lack of) archy (form of government)

is the lack of archons (rulers).

It is not the lack of rules.

It's the opposite of that.

Archons are exceptions to the rules.

Anarchy is the opposite of the society that we have today:

It is the consistent application of rules in society, where there are no exceptions.

Anarchy Is Order, Government Is Chaos.

Taxation isn't theft.

Do you want to fund wars?

I would assume not.

I can unsubscribe from Netflix.

I can't unsubscribe from government.

With taxes, you don't get to choose where the money is spent.

While it's going to pay for things like roads, it's also going to pay for war. That's barbaric.

A voluntary payment system means that you can choose funding to go to roads, and not to war.

That you can't choose where the money goes with taxation, means that it is involuntary.

Another word for involuntary spending of your money by another person, is theft.

(Reply to a comment on a video: "I have never heard a more dishonest or flawed interpretation of taxes in my life..."

What about the roads?

I want roads too.

I want you to be able to choose where your money goes.

Do you want to fund wars? I would assume not.

What about police?

In order to provide you the service of defense,

the police must first violate your right to self-ownership

by taking what is rightfully yours: the product of your labor - your money.

If they need to violate your right to self-ownership in order to provide you a service, it is not a service.


There is no free market!

The free market is voluntary interactions; trade.

You're right, it's historically been insanely suppressed, and that continues to this day.

If you want to have a free market, stop advocating slavery.

Isn't Democracy freedom? I'm in favor of a democratic society.

Democracy is demos (people) cracy (rule) - people ruling people.

That isn't freedom. That's slavery.

I know Democracy isn't freedom. That's why I advocate DIRECT Democracy.

Democracy is demos (people) cracy (rule) - people ruling people.

That isn't freedom. That's slavery.

Making other people DIRECT slaves is not freedom.

You're a naive idealist. When you grow up you'll become a conservative.

Where's that "hard realist" quote?

It is naive and idealist to think that continuing a system of slavery will result in freedom.

Why not vote a Voluntaryist President in?

Because Presidency is a violation of voluntaryism;

the president is using money stolen from millions of people at the point of a gun.

"But what about gradual, incremental change?"

The president is using money stolen from millions of people at the point of a gun.

In order to eliminate government, the president must first use it.

How is this different from "in order to provide services, the government must steal from you and others"?

You're not a Real anarchist.

The only precondition of anarchism is

the lack of belief in outside authority;

[an (the lack of) archy (archons - rulers)]

that you advocate a voluntary society,

one where rules are consistently-applicable.

Any exception to this is a form of rule (archons).

Having rulers is slavery.

Having rules is voluntary.

But property/ownership is theft!

To declare theft, you need to assert the notion of property rights.

Otherwise, by what measure or definition are you stealing anything?

If property rights exist, then they belong to the owners of the property.

Do you own your body, or can people mess with it at their comparatively arbitrary will?

And, whom have you stolen your body from?

"If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder!, my meaning would be understood at once."

A slave is physically dead? That's what murder means: You're DEAD.

Though often the result of running away, death is not equivalent with slavery.

"In writing this memoir against property, I bring against universal society an action petitoire [a legal claim to title]: I prove that those who do not possess to-day are proprietors by the same title as those who do possess; but, instead of inferring therefrom that property should be shared by all, I demand, in the name of general security, its entire abolition. If I fail to win my case, there is nothing left for us (the proletarian class and myself) but to cut our throats: we can ask nothing more from the justice of nations; for, as the code of procedure (art 26) tells us in its energetic style, the plaintiff who has been non-suited in an action petitoire, is debarred thereby from bringing an action possessoire. If, on the contrary, I gain the case, we must then commence an action possessoire, [a legal repossession] that we may be reinstated in the enjoyment of the wealth of which we are deprived by property. I hope that we shall not be forced to that extremity; but these two actions cannot be prosecuted at once, such a course being prohibited by the same code of procedure.

— Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What is Property? (emphasis added)"

Legality is a function of government, which is an involuntary societal system of interaction, being based on the violation of consent and making exceptions of people, thereby creating classes in society: the rulers, and the slaves. To ask for the abolishment of property, and to add insult to injury, by legal means, is to ask for the abolishment of self-ownership, is to ask for society to operate as a slave society. If he were to declare an end to corporations (a legal entity of the state), he might have a case in logic; further, were he to ask for the abolition of the belief in outside authority, he would be spot on, yet he could not argue against property, but instead fervently for it, as it is the basis of a voluntary society.

There will always be people who believe in outside authority.

Taxation is voluntary

You will never get everyone to agree and you will always have the same argument