If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Yes, most do. Anarcho-capitalists don't.
I'm not a racist.
And what positive rights are you referring to?
If the answer is the latter then what really would be so bad about doing something to change it rather than sitting back and excepting bad things like your philosphy seems to suggest..........
These 'rights' are dependent on others providing them.
In 'libertarian terms' you have the right to do what you want provided it doesn't violate others' rights to person and property.
As is property.
you only gain property in exchange for money, all you actually own is your Labour.
Thus restricting someones ability to get a job could be interpreted as denying them the right to property.........
But rights only exist in a social context. Technically whatever you own is property and you don't necessarily need someone else to acquire it.
But education and health care do. If you want somebody to teach you how to speak French then you might need someone to teach you. Same if you had an inflamed appendix; a person themselves may not have the knowledge to do anything about it!
So a right to property doesn't have to rely on others. Rights to education and healthcare do.
Look at your distorted language! The shameless robbery committing by the machine of violence named State with its all wonderful tools like the police, military, prisons is ’compassion’. Permissions given by the bunch of gangsters named government are ’freedoms’ and desire to get more, more and more at expense of one’s fellow man, his hard work, sweat and blood is ’positive rights’ or even ’human rights’!
Well… I am not in mood to discuss all philosophical, social, historical, economical etc. aspects of anarcho capitalism now. But I’d like to offer you three short articles written by three very different men. It’s not about some great matters but rather a kind of everyday-life anarchism.
Not wanting you jump from a site to a site I put it here
http://pages.quicksilver.net.nz/lajrlin/L/IgnoreThem.html
Enjoy!
Please back these claims up.
Libertarianism is an abomination of human nature. Please spare us all the accusations of 'immorality' and 'perversions' when talking about socialism because the system you believe in is the ugliest of them all- it even makes fascism look attractive.
Maybe so, but you can't force others to provide things for you.
There is no special right to anything.
Are these guys anarchists? They are, you can’t deny this.
Are they libertarians? They are and you can’t blame them in the opposite.
Are they popular humorists inventing oxymoron at every step to please the public? No, they aren’t. They are not playing verbal games you socialists love to play, they just try to live their lives in dignity and honesty.
The only mistake is ‘corrupted by capitalism’. No, it is corrupted by socialism. Capitalism is exactly the same rule, just applied to economical part of life. If it is true that one has no right to control other people’s sexual behaviour ( who, why, with whom and on which conditions may or may not sleep) it is also true that one has no right to control their economical behaviour ( what, why, to whom, from whom and for which price they may or may not buy and sell).
Anarcho-capitalists are not anarchists. To say they are, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of anarchist theory.
http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secF1.html
Smelly socks ( from ‘an-soc’, anarcho-socialism) believe in two things;
1. State is Evil.
2. Property is Theft.
Proud caps (from ‘an-cap’, anarcho-capitalism) believe in the first but not in the second.
These two assumptions just logically contradict each other, the thing ansocs never understand (because of their poor education)
As, I suspect, would practically everyone else.
no not really, not really at all
quite the opposite as you know full well
So you try to say your fridge is theft but my attempt to feed myself from it without your permission is not!
I’d like to live in your parallel universe filled with fools…
Offence IS harm DIPSHIT!!!
Harm is SO subjective, try a less ambigious limit.
Are you a millionaire LabRat? Because if you aren't, you'd be a victim of your own dream. Only the very rich could afford to live in your utopian world. The others can kiss health, education, public transport, law and order, safety, security and countless other things goodbye.
But never mind... I'm sure having to walk to work and not being able to visit a doctor (let alone have life-saving surgery) are small prices to pay for the Grand Libertarian Dream.
Dear oh dear...
Don't be ridiculous. Its you that has misappropriated the term.
Read some history.
This makes no sense whatsoever.
So if the great wise benevolent government feeds herds of edu-bureaucrats at my expense I will be educated.
But if I pay directly to a teacher missing their offices I never will.
Do you really understand what you are talking about?
He hasn't stated what as yet.:cool: