New Year Brings New Laws

[War on Want]

It's not "irrelevant" to talk about the reasoning and effectiveness of the laws. This is precisely the point I was making with you and what I got a ton of "oh how dare you"s over. You don't CARE if they're good laws or not, because they're just laws, and you hate them for that and that alone.

The use of force against others is unacceptable.

And if this is your philosophy even in the face of such things, fine. But I think it should be spelled out for all to see, that you don't care about the effectiveness of laws or not, only that they are, in the end, laws.

And this is, by the way, EXACTLY what I said in my first post that ended up getting a bunch of feign outrage.

It isn't feigned. The state is the enemy of individualism, of peace, of liberty and of freedom. We have explained why and you just carry on anyway, so please stop pretending to be so much above us.

Please explain to me how the state could be destroyed without individuality, peace, liberty and freedom being eroded and another state arising?

[War on Want]

It's not "irrelevant" to talk about the reasoning and effectiveness of the laws. This is precisely the point I was making with you and what I got a ton of "oh how dare you"s over. You don't CARE if they're good laws or not, because they're just laws, and you hate them for that and that alone.

The use of force against others is unacceptable.

And if this is your philosophy even in the face of such things, fine. But I think it should be spelled out for all to see, that you don't care about the effectiveness of laws or not, only that they are, in the end, laws.

And this is, by the way, EXACTLY what I said in my first post that ended up getting a bunch of feign outrage.

It isn't feigned. The state is the enemy of individualism, of peace, of liberty and of freedom. We have explained why and you just carry on anyway, so please stop pretending to be so much above us.

Please explain to me how the state could be destroyed without individuality, peace, liberty and freedom being eroded and another state arising?

Why would there be any need for another state? Once people realise it's complete uselessness, that will be it.

Oh I don't know because when there are power vaccuums generally others try to take control of things in their own local areas/regions. Let's say the American government falls and all state governments are totally destroyed too. There are unlimited freedoms and the government has no power. How would local groups like gangs, militias, wealthy individuals hiring forces etc not take control of their own regions and establish their own government within a matter of weeks?

[War on Want]

It's not "irrelevant" to talk about the reasoning and effectiveness of the laws. This is precisely the point I was making with you and what I got a ton of "oh how dare you"s over. You don't CARE if they're good laws or not, because they're just laws, and you hate them for that and that alone.

The use of force against others is unacceptable.

And if this is your philosophy even in the face of such things, fine. But I think it should be spelled out for all to see, that you don't care about the effectiveness of laws or not, only that they are, in the end, laws.

And this is, by the way, EXACTLY what I said in my first post that ended up getting a bunch of feign outrage.

It isn't feigned. The state is the enemy of individualism, of peace, of liberty and of freedom. We have explained why and you just carry on anyway, so please stop pretending to be so much above us.

Please explain to me how the state could be destroyed without individuality, peace, liberty and freedom being eroded and another state arising?

Why would there be any need for another state? Once people realise it's complete uselessness, that will be it.

Oh I don't know because when there are power vaccuums generally others try to take control of things in their own local areas/regions. Let's say the American government falls and all state governments are totally destroyed too. There are unlimited freedoms and the government has no power. How would local groups like gangs, militias, wealthy individuals hiring forces etc not take control of their own regions and establish their own government within a matter of weeks?

Because corporations/unions/communes/zoos could keep them in order.

Really? This is your whole entire argument? It's the same fucking point that I was making. Private groups and associations would take control and form their own society and government in time.

[War on Want]

If Somalia were secular humanist, that wouldn't be happening.

Try again.

This has been your argument every single time this issue comes up. It is a terrible one. Anytime there is a total collapse of government, local strongmen, corporations, and religious groups will take control in certain regions and fight amongst themselves. Anytime there is a total collapse of government there will be a huge drop in living standards and incomes for the vast majority of the populace.