When is ignoring/breaking the law acceptable?
Moderator: Global Moderator
- Ad Orientem
- Executive Member

- Posts: 3483
- Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
- Location: Florida USA
- Contact:
Re: When is ignoring/breaking the law acceptable?
I had no idea there were so many anarchists around. This thread has been something of an eye opener.
Trumpism is not a philosophy or a movement. It's a cult.
- Pointedstick
- Executive Member

- Posts: 8885
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: When is ignoring/breaking the law acceptable?
I find generally speaking that skilled, self-confident people who are on the path to financial success or have already achieved it sooner or later find that they have little use for government. What does the government have to offer someone who's psychologically and materially prepared to acquire for himself that of which he finds himself in need?Ad Orientem wrote: I had no idea there were so many anarchists around. This thread has been something of an eye opener.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
-
RuralEngineer
- Executive Member

- Posts: 686
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:26 pm
Re: When is ignoring/breaking the law acceptable?
I don't really consider myself an anarchist, more like an open minded small government advocate. For example, I once proposed election by lottery and I maintain that an improved result could be obtained from that method, but that's a different discussion. There are certain services I want that are traditionally provided by a government. For example, I do want a military capable of a strong national defense (not a world police force). I want a good national infrastructure to facilitate trade. These have traditionally been provided by a government, but if an alternative private solution were available, I would definitely be open to that possibility. I believe that government can work, it just has to be monitored vigilantly, kept as small as possible, and cleansed periodically.
Government is like a colon. If the waste isn't moving through quickly enough, cancer is almost inevitable.
Government is like a colon. If the waste isn't moving through quickly enough, cancer is almost inevitable.
Re: When is ignoring/breaking the law acceptable?
We are all anarchists in some ways.RuralEngineer wrote: I don't really consider myself an anarchist, more like an open minded small government advocate. For example, I once proposed election by lottery and I maintain that an improved result could be obtained from that method, but that's a different discussion. There are certain services I want that are traditionally provided by a government. For example, I do want a military capable of a strong national defense (not a world police force). I want a good national infrastructure to facilitate trade. These have traditionally been provided by a government, but if an alternative private solution were available, I would definitely be open to that possibility. I believe that government can work, it just has to be monitored vigilantly, kept as small as possible, and cleansed periodically.
Government is like a colon. If the waste isn't moving through quickly enough, cancer is almost inevitable.
No one obeys all laws.
Every attempt at controlling a population relies on some mixture of coercion and persuasion. Persuasion is the civilized way of controlling others, while coercion is what animals do to enforce control.
I don't mind any law that I am persuaded to follow through reason. For example, I don't mind driving the speed limit because I have been persuaded that it's not a bad idea. If, OTOH, there was a law against thinking bad thoughts about political leaders, I might have a hard time following it simply because there would be no way to persuade me that such a law made any sense.
People like being persuaded of things. That's why advertising works so well. I don't think that people like being coerced, and that's why they tend to resist coercion sooner or later.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
