Supporting some subset of state expenditures and thus tax collection = abuse?? Sounds like something a cultist might say. Just watch the video, it's quite entertaining.

Corporations are legal fictions created by the State to shield executives from liability… It’s like if I had a little hand-puppet, and I went to rob a bank, and the hand-puppet held the little gun and told people to hand over all the money, and then the hand-puppet grabbed the money and ran out, and then I got caught and I handed the hand-puppet over the police and then the police tried the hand-puppet, put the hand-puppet in jail, and I get to keep all the money.

Stefan Molyneux advocated disassociating if you were abused, I don't know where you're getting this from.

A rather simplistic view, the State is not responsible alone of it, deregulation and being against antitrust laws encouraged the emergence of big corporations abusing from their proeminent place in the market generating many barriers of entry to the market, since without these necessary laws, abuses are legion (as I explained you earlie in a chat).

Except corporations in America were created while regulation increased exponentially.

Stefan Molyneux advocated disassociating if you were abused, I don't know where you're getting this from.

Are you too afraid to watch the video because it might expose your hero as something less than admirable? And crush a part of your world view?

Crazy Stefan thinks that if I support the concept of state in some form, and thus taxes, then this means that I want you shot if you don't pay taxes. There is nothing between being an Anarcho-Capitalist and wanting bloodshed in Crazy Stefan's world.

Another interesting thing about Stefan is that he doesn't believe in intellectual property, however that doesn't prevent him from abusing DMCA notices to silence his critics. Don't do as I do, just do as I say.

Edited 5/17/2016 14:12:16

Another interesting thing about Stefan is that he doesn't believe in intellectual property, however that doesn't prevent him from abusing DMCA notices to silence his critics. Don't do as I do, just do as I say.

They were doxxing folk in those videos.

Crazy Stefan thinks that if I support the concept of state in some form, and thus taxes, then this means that I want you shot if you don't pay taxes. There is nothing between being an Anarcho-Capitalist and wanting bloodshed in Crazy Stefan's world.

Alright so what do you want to happen? Me put in gaol. And if I resist? I get shot

Except corporations in America were created while regulation increased exponentially.

Well I would expect more than a simple sentence to explain your point here.

Suppressing all the laws even the ones defending perfect competition such as the Antitrust laws would encourage an enormous amoral multinational megacorporation or conglomerate with powers (oligarchy) which are usually held by governments which values profits over ethics and life, but ultimately creates infinitely more harm than good (see the Economic Theory about Evil Corporation). By your position that you are currently defending, it would basically lead to another form of subservience not from the state but by a mega-corporation that would exist without laws defending a perfect and fair competition between companies and businesses.

Edited 5/17/2016 14:27:48

A government cannot be created from it's composite parts like you are proposing. This state would have infinite hardships attempting to corner markets like protection, various infrastructure markets, and folk who've had freedom and are willing to defend it.

They were doxxing folk in those videos.

YouTube is actually very strict when it comes to doxxing. They would have taken the videos down if there really was any doxxing going on. The truth is that there was no doxxing, and the self-professed Anarcho-Capitalist used copyright notices to take down perfectly legal videos that were simply giving him criticism that he couldn't refute.

Alright so what do you want to happen? Me put in gaol. And if I resist? I get shot

Yes, jail. If you resist violently and the police has no choice but to shoot you, then you being dead is not a result of you not paying taxes but you being violent to the police.

And let me point out that the police, the fire brigade, and state run hospitals save millions of lives every year. So by opposing taxes, you are advocating killing millions of people every single year. What a monster! For the benefit of everyone, please consider suicide.

A government cannot be created from it's composite parts like you are proposing. This state would have infinite hardships attempting to corner markets like protection, various infrastructure markets, and folk who've had freedom and are willing to defend it.

Quite unrealistic, freedom without laws defending them, again you are living in an utopian world Major.
A Megacorporation could easily enforce their power: These companies may be so powerful that they can ignore the law, possess their own heavily armed (often military-sized) private armies, hold 'sovereign' territory, and possibly even act as outright governments. These companies are primarily responsible to their shareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Evil companies may be larger than the economies of some of the states within which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically regulate the behavior of evil companies with regard to human rights or environmental rights. They often exercise a large degree of control over their employees, taking the idea of 'corporate culture' to an extreme.

Please The Lord, consider going to Syria and staying there. There's lots of folk trying to govern each other there, and they use violence to do it, so you will fit in.

The police attempting to take property away from you is a denial of property rights and a attack on you. You have the inherent right to resist with deadly force against robbers like that.

Please The Lord, consider going to Syria and staying there. There's lots of folk trying to govern each other there, and they use violence to do it, so you will fit in.

Better Assad than ISIS tbh.

The police attempting to take property away from you is a denial of property rights and a attack on you. You have the inherent right to resist with deadly force against robbers like that.

Denial of property rights huh? What about rapists and murderers, then? Are they morally allowed to defend themselves against people who want to punish them in some way, such as throwing them to prison? Or is it everyone fend for themselves?

They deny property rights too, no reason you shouldn't be able to shoot them if they're attacking you. If it's post crime, try them and if they're guilty, shoot them , gaol them, or kick them out of town.

They deny property rights too, no reason you shouldn't be able to shoot them if they're attacking you. If it's post crime, try them and if they're guilty, shoot them , gaol them, or kick them out of town.

But how do I try them if there is no state and thereby no courts? Vigilante justice? Can I decide myself what punishment is appropriate?

Get some folk together, review evidence and vote.

Get some folk together, review evidence and vote.

:)
You don't believe that's enough yourself, do you?

Since there is no state, there is no law, no courts, no judges, no police. But now a handful of average Joes should be able to do what is difficult even for professional judges, that is find out the probable truth of the matter and eventually agree on a fitting punishment/verdict. And they cannot exactly put the culprit into jail, can they? There is no police, no prison guard, no nothing to make sure the inmates stay in place. They pretty much have to do a Molineux on the spot (ie shoot the murderer between the eyes). Is this seriously an improvement to current society in your view?

But now a handful of average Joes should be able to do what is difficult even for professional judges, that is find out the probable truth of the matter and eventually agree on a fitting punishment/verdict

Juries already do this, and they're pretty average folk in them.

And they cannot exactly put the culprit into jail, can they? There is no police, no prison guard, no nothing to make sure the inmates stay in place

Local gaols, private gaols and volunteer gaolers/private gaolers.

Is this seriously an improvement to current society in your view?

Better than now, so yes. Not tens of thousands of folk in gaol for victimless crimes.

Juries already do this, and they're pretty average folk in them.

There may be a jury at the lowest level court to find the right punishment. Even in those courts they don't entrust juries with the finding of fact. That's what the judge does. They don't trust juries with pretty much anything. Even in current society where there is such a thing as law. In your dream society, juries would give judgement based on how they are feeling that day.

Local gaols, private gaols and volunteer gaolers/private gaolers.

Who would volunteer to bee a jailkeeper? You? And why do you assume there to be such a thing as private jails, private jailers, or private property? And even if that were not a problem, how would people trade goods? By trading apples for oranges? Would they keep gold locked up in their house.

Better than now, so yes. Not tens of thousands of folk in gaol for victimless crimes.

How do you expect the average Joe to give fair and good verdicts in court if 99% of them don't even understand the merits of your anarchist utopia? You are basically modeling your justice system after Australian aboriginals or Native Americans.

the major general should move to somalia and live out his fantasy there

let us know how it goes for you