Sign In or Create an Account
Now we know where all those workers went. They're at home and or streets getting high to the point of self destruction. Not good for them. And the labor situation in general isn't good for any of us.
I still don't think it makes since to buy leases of land form the government, $400,000 to preserve a small patch of trees for $25 years.
It would make more sense if the land was permanently auctioned off. Then the environmentalists don't even have an expense. They have an asset they can sell off at any point to buy other land they value preserving more. And they could convince more 3rd party funders of their project to chip in knowing that it is financially sound.
You then can add recreational elements to it to try to raise a revenue and use the revenue to service loans that could be used to acquire more land.. permanently.
Whether you think the idea that no human differences can exist is a misguided idea or not, there is one simply way to make sure that government never acts on any misguided dogma to our disservice, which is to not have government acting at all.
There is nothing wrong with recognizing the potential for human differences in an ancap philosophy if we all have a firm recognition that the NAP is extended to all. Recognition of the potential for these differences also encourages a more lazie faire approach to addressing differences in outcomes, recognizing that government response may not be able to address some underlying causes that may be unaddressable in general, and recognizing that acceptance of differing outcomes is ok. We don't all have to be the same, and we don't have to hate either.
But the longer government attempts to act against reality the less successful it becomes, and the more likely it is to put infinite resources towards a cause that due to dogma generated misunderstanding can never yield a sought outcome.
The "scientific" conclusion that all races are the same was not scientific at all as such "proof" originated from Richard Lewontin, a marxist, who admitted to shaping his conclusions around marxist principles, and admitting to stifling debate by focusing it on emotions rather than honest scientific discourse. Thus scientific discourse wasn't allowed and thus no science exists because science is the product of certain principles being applied in a community, including the open discussion of a topic on rational rather than emotional terms. The science is not concluded.
No I'm not. The NAP is not absolute pacifism. It's the idea that you have no right to encroach on the rights of others when they have never done the same to you.
Those who do need to be lopped out of an ancap society as quickly and decisively as can be done, using whatever methods are necessary to ensure that happens. If that means a bullet to the head, as long as its not by a government, I'm cool with it.
Any gray areas should be discussed rather than escalated. Mass robbery and ruin is not a gray area.
No NAP for the No NAPs.
In the limited cases where they are not, they are even more dangerous.
Tune them out. With radio that's very easy. If the product of people yelling their RF signals is something nobody wants to listen to, then I guess no one will listen to it and no one will yell it. If it is something people want to listen to (most likely), then it has served its practical purpose and there is no problem to solve.
No they don't. In fact the devastating amount of disorder we see today comes from the consolidation of power in the government and the resulting political war over its control.
The treatment of them as if they were at odds is what causes disorder.
Most will just admit they will use violence. The NAP isn't a concept in their world. In fact most of them pursue anarcho communism as an excuse to be violent without the guilt of considering they might be wrong.