Government.

[Blurred]

I addressed those problems earlier and you're still thinking about chaotic anarchy that appears when governments fall; you're not thinking of anarchy that appears when people become informed and decide to do what is in their best interest and naturally do what is mutually beneficial.

Lets say his society succeeds

Not my society.

We need government; therefore, we need order and we need balance. What happens if this "society" gets attacked by another country who HAS government? Who are you going to send? Your private agency?

[selenne]

I addressed those problems earlier and you're still thinking about chaotic anarchy that appears when governments fall; you're not thinking of anarchy that appears when people become informed and decide to do what is in their best interest and naturally do what is mutually beneficial.

Lets say his society succeeds

Not my society.

We need government; therefore, we need order and we need balance. What happens if this "society" gets attacked by another country who HAS government? Who your gonna send? Your private agency?

why would a happy and nice country who has government (that makes everything work perfectly) attack a simple country thats living in peace, but without government?




edit: oh wait, i know one country that invades other countries with no reason. or with no fair reason.

[Reise]

you're not thinking of anarchy that appears when people become informed and decide to do what is in their best interest and naturally do what is mutually beneficial.

If such a thing were ever possible we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Scenario: The free society is inhabiting one end of the planet, living peacefully and in general prosperity, yet they are not unified, and concerned with personal goals. On the other end of the planet (hell, right next door if you want), another society formed by banding together and conquering other lesser societies is telling you to either accept their dominion or be forcefully taken. What can the free society do without any form of cooperative defense or structure in this situation?

Scenario 2: The free society is thriving throughout the whole world. A small group of people decide they can improve their standard of living by cooperating with each other, and excluding other people from their benefits. After all, resources in a free for all society would likely be quite scarce. They grow/hunt their own food, and pledge to help each other whenever one of them is in need. Time passes and the small group slowly becomes very prosperous, and mostly unchallenged by "criminals" because of their size and unity. Other people soon notice the group and realize they would be far safer if they were included and decide to join, as you said, to work together for a mutual benefit. Eventually this group (though it is generally peaceful and cooperative) gets very large, and suddenly other similar groups appear, whether by a sense of jealousy or necessity (distance/specific needs/etc).

Can you see where I'm going with this?

[Blurred]

why would a happy and nice country who has government (that makes everything work perfectly) attack a simple country thats living in peace, but without government?




edit: oh wait, i know one country that invades other countries with no reason. or with no fair reason.

Imperialism? (its original historical sense has been abolished mostly with the end of colonialism... but hey, utopias can exist right? )

[Jstar1]

That could only happen in an infant libertarian society where people are not well informed and are easily manipulated. If most understand and respect property rights it will be impossible for such an entity to take root and grow. Persuasive speech doesn't work. Why do you think when a country fights an unjustified war it's media has to work so hard to create propaganda? Why do you think propaganda exist and why do you think the media is constantly half-assing the truth? Because people are intelligent and if they knew the truth they would soon reject it.

ok we get it that you're passionately angry and unhappy about the American government. If your so zealous about all this why dont you start a blog or set up a website to spread your beliefs?

You're tricking yourself into believing that there actually is a substantial number of people who agree with you and that in just a few centuries, when all the millions of Americans think like you, we will have a beautiful utopia without government. Sorry but thats not going to happen.

[Barotix]

I addressed those problems earlier and you're still thinking about chaotic anarchy that appears when governments fall; you're not thinking of anarchy that appears when people become informed and decide to do what is in their best interest and naturally do what is mutually beneficial.

Lets say his society succeeds

Not my society.

We need government; therefore, we need order and we need balance. What happens if this "society" gets attacked by another country who HAS government? Who are you going to send? Your private agency?

Government creates balance and order? The people create balance and order; you don't need someone to to control your actions in order to create order, but let's say some country (let's call it Amerik) invades a free society. First of all; who would they be fighting? Everyone in the society? Even the people that did nothing? It's preposterous to say another country will invade a region where sovereign individuality, and property rights thrive. Since foreign relations will be done on a person to person or private organization to private organzation basis.

If someone threatened your way of life would you sit back and chill? Such a free society will band together to stay free. Besides, most disputes would be between individuals (as they are in our society).

If someone invaded the hood tonight there would be gunshots from Harlem to washington heights. I wouldn't be fighting for white america's dream, I wouldn't be fighting for racist churches in the south my *****, I would be fighting for my people and self-esteem my *****. (way of life)

Now say Amerik has a dispute with John, my neighbor. What does that dispute have to do with me? Why does propaganda exist?

The free society is inhabiting one end of the planet, living peacefully and in general prosperity, yet they are not unified, and concerned with personal goals. On the other end of the planet (hell, right next door if you want), another society formed by banding together and conquering other lesser societies is telling you to either accept their dominion or be forcefully taken. What can the free society do without any form of cooperative defense or structure in this situation?

Now, I believe if a group is threatening an entire free society's way of life it is in their best interest to momentarily band together to protect their own property. If Group A is threatening society B rather than just john of Society B then society B will by all means band together to fight.

The free society is thriving throughout the whole world. A small group of people decide they can improve their standard of living by cooperating with each other, and excluding other people from their benefits. After all, resources in a free for all society would likely be quite scarce. They grow/hunt their own food, and pledge to help each other whenever one of them is in need. Time passes and the small group slowly becomes very prosperous, and mostly unchallenged by "criminals" because of their size and unity. Other people soon notice the group and realize they would be far safer if they were included and decide to join, as you said, to work together for a mutual benefit. Eventually this group (though it is generally peaceful and cooperative) gets very large, and suddenly other similar groups appear, whether by a sense of jealousy or necessity (distance/specific needs/etc).

That does not constitute a Government. Still, no-one is governing and that is the same model that I'm proposing. A free society that "works together" because it is mutually beneficial. Naturally other free societies will form that try to model the original society. Like a set of dominoes. Exclusion of another free society will only prove to be lucrative for a certain amount of time. In such a free society if one believes sharing resources (through trade) is lucrative and beneficial it will be done. So long as the group does not collectively own the resources there should be no problems(In such a scenario the "Tragedy of the commons" will occur in which the group ends up destroying itself as governments are doing today); such a group is self destructive and no individual would willingly give up freedom unless lied to and manipulated. If the group consist of liberty minded people the moment they see their freedoms being infringed upon they will disband. If another country invaded a region like that who would they be fighting? There is no real enemy. Just a group of people that trade. Free men also tend to have better technology than men who are restricted. Another thing is a free man will fight ferociously for freedom whereas a man fighting a war he disagrees with will be very lackluster. That is why governments must constantly feed their minions propaganda.

Keep the questions coming.

ok we get it that you're passionately angry and unhappy about the American government. If your so zealous about all this why dont you start a blog or set up a website to spread your beliefs?

You're tricking yourself into believing that there actually is a substantial number of people who agree with you and that in just a few centuries, when all the millions of Americans think like you, we will have a beautiful utopia without government. Sorry but thats not going to happen.

I LOLED AT THAT ENTIRE STATEMENT. America; pfft, I'm against government, period

The second paragraph is a huge LOL. C4L, Mises, Lewrockwell, and numerous other liberty minded groups/blogs exist. More people than you can imagine believe in liberty and respect property rights. I guess America has come so far that liberty is some impossible feat now. I can't believe a fellow American is rejecting liberty. I do blog and there are far more like me than you can imagine. More Americans and foreigners support the constitution and freedom.

There's a reason libertarian groups exist.
There's a reason mises blog, forum, and sit exist.
There's a reason lewrockwell exist.
How about the many Austrian Economist?
You're denying their existence too?

So you're trying to tell me that people that agree with the message of liberty and the protection of property rights don't exist?

[inky]

There's a reason why a utopian country does not and could not possibly exist. Everyone has their own version of a "perfect" society, even if that means that it has to be imperfect. For example, Celebration, Florida might be considered as a "perfect" town by some people, even by some who would say otherwise. Let's pretend you somehow had a chance to make the decision whether the world would either remain the same and people would continue to get murdered, raped, and robbed or the world would completely change and will never have a single crime in exchange for living in a "Pleasantville-like" world, what answer would you give?

The same goes for governments. Would you actually put your faith in humanity and believe that everyone is good at heart and that they wouldn't take the opportunity to rob, kill, or rape you or your loved ones if they knew that there would be no government to impose laws or spend thousands of dollars trying to hunt them down or investigate crimes? Then again, would you say that this government works specifically to serve the people in their best interest and would never treat another "innocent" human being like some expendable pawn? That the people in the government are after certain positions only so that they could serve the people? Or maybe that a communist society would actually work, that the "temporary" leader is actually willing to be temporary or that someone wouldn't take his/her place after resigning?

Personally, there's a lot of things I don't like about the American government..or any government for that matter. Mainly the fact that people are nothing more than expendable resources to them and certain things, no, everything about the criminal justice system. But at the same time, I'm not willing to place my trust on humanity (or people in my neighborhood) the same way I distrust those who are holding positions in the government and/or controlling the majority of wealth in the country. The only thing to do is to adapt and stay away from politics as much as possible..at least for me.

[Grandpa]

...Professional arbiters will be paid; therefore, they must satisfy their customer.

What if a man attempts to rob a bank but the private protection agency that the bank has a contract with apprehends the man?
Like the Pinkerton Detective Agency back in 1850?

What will the agency do? First he must return the money he stole
Oh, my -- a bank robber can't lie about where he hid the money? Nice.

and pay for the lost time he caused the bank (time is money) and he must pay for the expenses of the agency.
Sure, after the honest bank robber makes amends then what?

A head arbitrator with a board of sub arbitrators will bring forth the contracts and determine the appropriate amount of payment the robber owes the bank. Just enough to compensate for the lost time a agency expenses.
Justice must be served it seems...

What if the robber cannot afford to pay for the agency and lost time? The arbitrators would provide a contract to deal with such behavior. In the meantime the agency may gray-list the thief (i.e.) work with this customer at your own risk. Financially unstable.
So then the "gray-listed" bank robber won't be able to rob other banks while under contract and unable to find suitable employment?

Your plan needs work, friend. Criminals exist and they don't play by the rules
_________________________________________________
It's preposterous to say another country will invade a region where sovereign individuality, and property rights thrive.

Really? Nations with expansionist policies won't pick prosperous targets that have no ability to defend themselves? Leave your door unlocked. Advertise it. Go ahead, I dare you. Better yet, just post your real address here on the SRF board - you know you wanna... Risk vs. reward, friend. Risk vs. reward. That is the only criterion a thief evaluates, doesn't matter what form the thief comes in, if it be individual or national.

Your idea of being able to "quickly band together" means that you think military training is counter productive. You'd choose to fight on the side of farmers with ideals over fight on the winning side? Interesting. You'd lose, but I do respect your ideals. I wonder if your concept of a free society comes with the offer of a free casket?

[XemnasXD]

So you're trying to tell me that people that agree with the message of liberty and the protection of property rights don't exist?

your turning into a tool....

there are those who believe in Liberty and the protection of property and don't believe in anything you preach. Stop acting like people who don't see your point of view don't believe in freedom, prosperity, liberty etc....

[Blurred]

Government creates balance and order? The people create balance and order; you don't need someone to to control your actions in order to create order, but let's say some country (let's call it Amerik) invades a free society. First of all; who would they be fighting? Everyone in the society? Even the people that did nothing? It's preposterous to say another country will invade a region where sovereign individuality, and property rights thrive. Since foreign relations will be done on a person to person or private organization to private organzation basis.

Ok. What if they take over your land, they will have an army with military minds, and strategies. You cant tell me your "utopians" will know what to do, i doubt you will have any weapons because HEY! Remember where your living.

[Barotix]

I'm loving SRF tonight; keep the questions coming.

The same goes for governments. 2]Would you actually put your faith in humanity and believe that everyone is good at heart and 3]that they wouldn't take the opportunity to rob, kill, or rape you or your loved ones if they knew that there would be no government to impose laws or spend thousands of dollars trying to hunt them down or investigate crimes? 4]Then again, would you say that this government works specifically to serve the people in their best interest and would never treat another "innocent" human being like some expendable pawn?

1]There's a reason why a utopian country does not and could not possibly exist.

1]I see the problem. Such a society is not a country. Countries aren't living entities. Only individuals exist. The individuals are naturally entitled to certain property rights that are universal and cannot only be infringed upon if someone uses force. Since such a society would exist as a group of individuals first and as a "society" (or group of people that share the same ideals and principles. That's as far as it goes.) second one would never have to worry about another's idea of a perfect "country" as they (countries) are not important; third, liberty minded people do exist.

2]People are selfish and do what is in their best interest. So let them do what is in their best interest. As long as they respect property rights only minor disputes should arise.

3]A liberty minded group of individuals that chose to abolish their government would have one understood "law": Respect property rights AKA Human rights. Private detective agencies exist and are superior to police. Private protection is also superior to state owned protection. Since all property is private how would a rapist get away with rape, how would a killer get away with murder, and how would a robber get away with theft? It's impossible. State owned police help after crimes happen; Private protection agencies and private police are on the patrol all the time. Since the owner of that street would seek to protect his property he would hire such agencies to do the job. Now, why do crimes increase when gun laws take effect? Because people who commit crimes are cowards. If you know every street is private and that every property owner has private protection then why (unless mentally unstable) would someone attempt to commit a crime? You would lose far more than you would gain unlike in governments where crime goes unchecked and the only crime that gets any attention is victim less crime.

4]Government is coercive monopoly that can only exist by using force to manipulate it's subjects.

Criminals exist

Because they have nothing to fear. It's the same old Gun laws VS No Gun laws.. Risk VS Reward. Would you higher a known criminal? I wouldn't, maybe you would.
@Grandpa, Mercenaries and private protection agencies prove to be better than government backed armies. A large group of mercenaries and private protection agencies can oust and would-be invader.

You cant tell me your "utopians" will know what to do, i doubt you will have any weapons because HEY! Remember where your living.

Why wouldn't people have weapons? The primary use of a weapon should be for protection.

your turning into a tool....

there are those who believe in Liberty and the protection of property and don't believe in anything you preach. 1]Stop acting like people who don't see your point of view don't believe in freedom, prosperity, liberty etc....

No really? Prosperity results from liberty and freedom. False: If you say you agree with liberty then you're fine. If you a lot of people don't agree with liberty then you're in the wrong. I am just one type of many.

[Reise]

That could only happen in an infant libertarian society where people are not well informed and are easily manipulated. If most understand and respect property rights it will be impossible for such an entity to take root and grow. Persuasive speech doesn't work. Why do you think when a country fights an unjustified war it's media has to work so hard to create propaganda? Why do you think propaganda exist and why do you think the media is constantly half-assing the truth? Because people are intelligent and if they knew the truth they would soon reject it.

You're exactly right.

The US government is far from perfect, and with time it's only getting worse. That's not to say no government at all would be ideal, or even conceivable.

I think it was Jefferson himself who said in order to keep a healthy and fair government, revolutions are necessary every 20 or so years. It was on that Penn & Teller's Bullshit show a while back, the one about guns.

That does not constitute a Government. Still, no-one is governing and that is the same model that I'm proposing.

Governments didn't really exist in human culture until someone picked up a rock and started calling the shots I think. It's sorta the natural way of things. Why cooperate when I can just smash your skull in and take your camp? More food and shelter for me.

People realized coming together was their best chance for survival against such problems. And for any progress to be made, somebody has to bring the community together. Leaders showed up, unified people (either by force or by permission) and soon the guy with the rock was no match for a bunch of guys with rocks. The rest is history.

A free society that "works together" because it is mutually beneficial. Naturally other free societies will form that try to model the original society. Like a set of dominoes. Exclusion of another free society will only prove to be lucrative for a certain amount of time. In such a free society if one believes sharing resources (through trade) is lucrative and beneficial it will be done. So long as the group does not collectively own the resources there should be no problems(In such a scenario the "Tragedy of the commons" will occur in which the group ends up destroying itself as governments are doing today); such a group is self destructive and no individual would willingly give up freedom unless lied to and manipulated.

Which unfortunately is an inevitability. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and just the mere taste of it can as well. Once these communities naturally select representatives for their society to make decisions, the representatives will no doubt exploit every advantage to benefit their progression as a people. It only takes one person to start the sequence, eventually you'll have people in that society believing that in order to further their prosperity, they should follow a leader. Just hope that leader is blind to the resources and wealth of other communities.

Already we are outlining the early progression of modern government.

If the group consist of liberty minded people the moment they see their freedoms being infringed upon they will disband. If another country invaded a region like that who would they be fighting? There is no real enemy. Just a group of people that trade. Free men also tend to have better technology than men who are restricted. Another thing is a free man will fight ferociously for freedom whereas a man fighting a war he disagrees with will be very lackluster. That is why governments must constantly feed their minions propaganda.

How did Rome become so large? They unified and took things over. It doesn't matter if others are united or not. A society that does not acknowledge the need to preserve itself is not a society.

There are many many many MANY reasons why governments exist. But in order to accommodate everyone in society, some things have to be "unfair". People have yet to discover what sort of government works for everyone, and with that ever-present hunger for power, it's doubtful we ever will.

[Grandpa]

Hey! I'm starting to like this. I'll start a "private protection agency" - and I get Reise on my side - he and my sons will protect your open door, Barotix and all we require is that you don't call the payments you have to make to us "extortion".

Yeah, that's the ticket.

[Blurred]

I'm loving SRF tonight; keep the questions coming.

The same goes for governments. 2]Would you actually put your faith in humanity and believe that everyone is good at heart and 3]that they wouldn't take the opportunity to rob, kill, or rape you or your loved ones if they knew that there would be no government to impose laws or spend thousands of dollars trying to hunt them down or investigate crimes? 4]Then again, would you say that this government works specifically to serve the people in their best interest and would never treat another "innocent" human being like some expendable pawn?

1]There's a reason why a utopian country does not and could not possibly exist.

1]I see the problem. Such a society is not a country. Countries aren't living entities. Only individuals exist. The individuals are naturally entitled to certain property rights that are universal and cannot only be infringed upon if someone uses force. Since such a society would exist as a group of individuals first and as a "society" (or group of people that share the same ideals and principles. That's as far as it goes.) second one would never have to worry about another's idea of a perfect "country" as they (countries) are not important; third, liberty minded people do exist.

2]People are selfish and do what is in their best interest. So let them do what is in their best interest. As long as they respect property rights only minor disputes should arise.

3]A liberty minded group of individuals that chose to abolish their government would have one understood "law": Respect property rights AKA Human rights. Private detective agencies exist and are superior to police. Private protection is also superior to state owned protection. Since all property is private how would a rapist get away with rape, how would a killer get away with murder, and how would a robber get away with theft? It's impossible. State owned police help after crimes happen; Private protection agencies and private police are on the patrol all the time. Since the owner of that street would seek to protect his property he would hire such agencies to do the job. Now, why do crimes increase when gun laws take effect? Because people who commit crimes are cowards. If you know every street is private and that every property owner has private protection then why (unless mentally unstable) would someone attempt to commit a crime? You would lose far more than you would gain unlike in governments where crime goes unchecked and the only crime that gets any attention is victim less crime.

4]Government is coercive monopoly that can only exist by using force to manipulate it's subjects.

Criminals exist

Because they have nothing to fear. It's the same old Gun laws VS No Gun laws.. Risk VS Reward.

SO your saying, everything is private. Banks have a form of private detectives? (no government, so no FDIC?) So how would someone acquire this position of "detective" if everything is private? Will these detectives have bosses? But wait! He's calling the shots. Let's call it Monarchy. Isn't that a form of government? Hes the guy behind the "police" he can change and bend the rules since theirs no real government to step in. He rises into power, shits on all of us. We get enslaved. End.

[Draquish]

I believe that under the right social structure, government is not needed.

[Reise]

Hey! I'm starting to like this. I'll start a "private protection agency" - and I get Reise on my side - he and my sons will protect your open door, Barotix and all we require is that you don't call the payments you have to make to us "extortion".

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Good thing I stocked up on ammunition this month.

[Grandpa]

I believe that under the right social structure, government is not needed.

So do I, actually. But religion doesn't enter in to this, does it?

[Reise]

Religion presents a whole new set of issues for this kind of thing heh.

Human interests aside, just wait till they start following an all-powerful being.

[Barotix]

And how did Rome fall? From a combined might of barbarian invaders and eventual collapse under it's own weight. Except it won't be barbarian invaders for modern society. It will be bad economic policy. So you believe that government is a natural result of the free market? Governments are composed of people and first you must convince the people to go to war through lies and manipulation. If the whole of the society never harmed Government A, and the people of Government A know this then why would they aid their government? The government must use conscription and propaganda to create a sufficient invasion force. When people see freedom they will want to emulate it. If there is a government less society (a society without a central government) that is free and prosperous what people would not want to emulate it? The resulting effect will be people of other nations emigrating to the free nation, and those that stay will try to gain more freedoms. As the government loses it's infrastructure it will grow aggressive and restrict it's people more. The people will fight back and eventually government will collapse. See another free nation thriving they will then form one that models it. The domino effect begins.

You're ignoring the most crucial factor: Education. If the people are aware of what occurred under government in the past then why would they head towards such a system? Awareness and education; these are the most important elements in such a society.

So Many post =_=

Hey! I'm starting to like this. I'll start a "private protection agency" - and I get Reise on my side - he and my sons will protect your open door, Barotix and all we require is that you don't call the payments you have to make to us "extortion".

Extortion? If I freely choose to pay you to protect my house from intruders then how am I being extorted? Aren't there private protection agencies in modern society? Yes. Open door? My door is closed. You don't have the keys: I am paying you to protect my property. I am not being extorted.

[Blurred]

And how did Rome fall? From a combined might of barbarian invaders and eventual collapse under it's own weight. Except it won't be barbarian invaders for modern society. It will be bad economic policy. So you believe that government is a natural result of the free market? Governments are composed of people and first you must convince the people to go to war through lies and manipulation. If the whole of the society never harmed Government A, and the people of Government A know this then why would they aid their government? The government must use conscription and propaganda to create a sufficient invasion force. When people see freedom they will want to emulate it. If there is a government less society (a society without a central government) that is free and prosperous what people would not want to emulate it? The resulting effect will be people of other nations emigrating to the free nation, and those that stay will try to gain more freedoms. As the government loses it's infrastructure it will grow aggressive and restrict it's people more. The people will fight back and eventually government will collapse. See another free nation thriving they will then form one that models it. The domino effect begins.

You're ignoring the most crucial factor: Education. If the people are aware of what occurred under government in the past then why would they head towards such a system? Awareness and education; these are the most important elements in such a society.

So Many post =_=

Rome was to big to support itself.

[Draquish]

I believe that under the right social structure, government is not needed.

So do I, actually. But religion doesn't enter in to this, does it?

Nope. In my idealist view, it exits. ^.^

[Barotix]

eventual collapse under it's own weight.

Rome was to big to support itself.

[Blurred]

eventual collapse under it's own weight.

Rome was to big to support itself.

Relax dude i was supporting you on this one.

[Barotix]

SO your saying, everything is private. Banks have a form of private detectives? (no government, so no FDIC?) So how would someone acquire this position of "detective" if everything is private? Will these detectives have bosses? But wait! He's calling the shots. Let's call it Monarchy. Isn't that a form of government? Hes the guy behind the "police" he can change and bend the rules since theirs no real government to step in. He rises into power, shits on all of us. We get enslaved. End.

If you want to be a detective you acquire capital to start a small P.I. group (what a coincidence these exist in real life too: P.I.s).

How is having a boss that pays you to work a monarchy. Does that mean a Manager at McDonalds is a monarch? Wait; Alright. Do you guys understand the concept of "non-initiation of force?"

[Reise]

Extortion? If I freely choose to pay you to protect my house from intruders then how am I being extorted? Aren't there private protection agencies in modern society? Yes. Open door? My door is closed. You don't have the keys: I am paying you to protect my property. I am not being extorted.

Good? Bad?

I'm the guy with the gun.

[Barotix]

Extortion? If I freely choose to pay you to protect my house from intruders then how am I being extorted? Aren't there private protection agencies in modern society? Yes. Open door? My door is closed. You don't have the keys: I am paying you to protect my property. I am not being extorted.

Good? Bad?

I'm the guy with the gun.

Why would you harm a customer? Do Private defense agencies harm their customers in real life? (I'm trying to think of that one; with those corny commercials where someone breaks into a house and an alarm goes off.) The difference here would be these agencies would have contracts with a police agency or have their own police agency that is used when trouble occurs. So I'm technically protected by police as I sleep at night, right? Good? Bad? He's the guy with the gun. How is extortion beneficial to you? People won't buy your services. You'll be broke and out of business. Property rights come into play; in a free society I would have a weapon as well. So why aren't government police broke and out of business? Because you're extorted and have no say in the matter. If a Private police department grows large and proves to be more successful than the government police, restrictions will be raised by the government to protect their assets from competition and they will cripple the private department.

Free Information.
Free Thought.
Private Property Rights.

Human ingenuity > Government Monopolies.

[XemnasXD]

If people don't buy your services you can still make them if your the one with the gun. Its called organized crime and its been going on for hundreds of years...

[Reise]

With every argument Baro, you create so many points for counter arguments that I can't list them all.

When I have the weapon, I am in charge. People/businesses will buy my protection because they have to. Ever hear about the Mafia? I will make you an offer you can't refuse.

And why would you need bodyguards if you have the means to defend yourself?

Police are paid by the state, which is a world away when you're talking about an "independent defense agency". And who says every Police officer is an honest officer? You know damn well there are some bad seeds out there.

In a free society there are no rights. Just the assumption that people should cooperate.

I still can't see how you believe people could ever accomplish this.

[Blurred]

With every argument Baro, you create so many points for counter arguments that I can't list them all.

When I have the weapon, I am in charge. People/businesses will buy my protection because they have to. Ever hear about the Mafia? I will make you an offer you can't refuse.

And why would you need bodyguards if you have the means to defend yourself?

Police are paid by the state, which is a world away when you're talking about an "independent defense agency". And who says every Police officer is an honest officer? You know damn well there are some bad seeds out there.

In a free society there are no rights. Just the assumption that people should cooperate.

I still can't see how you believe people could ever accomplish this.

Exactly. This is what i stated earlier.

[Barotix]

If people don't buy your services you can still make them if your the one with the gun. Its called organized crime and its been going on for hundreds of years...

Organized crime results from government restrictions as they work and can only thrive in the black market. You must make a distinction between chaotic government collapse and people that would rather be left alone.

When I have the weapon, I am in charge. People/businesses will buy my protection because they have to. Ever hear about the Mafia? I will make you an offer you can't refuse.

Organized crime results from government restrictions as the work in the black market.

In a free market society organized "crime" would be pointless.

And who says every Police officer is an honest officer? You know damn well there are some bad seeds out there.

And these bad seeds often go unchecked. What happens to a man that isn't doing his job properly or efficiently on the market? He's replaced.

In a free society there are no rights. Just the assumption that people should cooperate.

As said by Draq, a free society could work if it were structured properly. Such a society structured, under Liberty, freedom, and the protection of private property rights, would understand all the underlying principles that keep their society prosperous and would not forgo them. You still ignore awareness and education.

I still can't see how you believe people could ever accomplish this.

I have trust in Human Ingenuity.

With every argument Baro, you create so many points for counter arguments that I can't list them all.

Such points only exist in a society that does not understand Liberty, freedom, and the protection of property rights. Such points are only brought up because they exist due to government restrictions. I don't think you understand Libertarianism very well.