[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

DRAFT version of Federal "Justice" Shutdown Project



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 03/22/2018 04:41 PM, jim bell wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thursday, March 22, 2018, 12:30:10 PM PDT, juan
> <juan.g71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:43:27 +0000 (UTC) jim bell
> <jdb10987 at yahoo.com <mailto:jdb10987 at yahoo.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> I notice that you don't distinguish between public (government) 
>> borders and private (private property) borders.  Why is that?I
>> oppose government borders.  But I believe in the concept of
>> private property, which amounts to the right to exclude others
>> from that property.  We live on the surface (2 dimensional, more
>> or less) of a sphere (Earth) and we desire to travel and have
>> goods (and information) brought to us.  That will require that
>> roads
> 
> 
>> Come on Jim. I already refuted your right wing, fake
> libertarian garbage.
> 
> 
> 
> Utter and complete nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
>> And it's quite funny how an engineer isn't
> aware of the fact that there is AIR TRAVEL and SEA TRAVEL and that
> right-wing fake 'anarchists' haven't claimed to own the SEA and the
> SkY, at least YET.
> 
> 
> 
> I was not including air travel and sea travel because I didn't
> consider it relevant to the current discussion.
> 
> 
> 
>> So, please stop defending STATE BORDERS like you did and stop
> wholly misrepresenting libertarian philosphy.
> 
> 
> 
> I think I already said that I opposed government borders.
> 
> 
> 
>> For what it's worth, I also oppose it when government requires
>> people to show some sort of identification in order to travel.
> 
> Do you really? But that's what happens when ICE DOES ITS JOB eh?
> 

For someone who supports freedom of travel and who opposes the
requirement of papers - what legitimate "job" does ICE do ?

Honestly, TSA and ICE just look like jobs programs to me. Jobs
programs to satisfy authoritarians.

- --- Marina

> 
>>> But I believe I cannot prohibit it if a private
>>> (non-governmental) company such as an airline decides, for
>>> itself, that it will insist on identification in order to allow
>>> passengers to travel.
> 
>> lawl - didn't your mommny teach you not to lie? You actually 
>> don't object to the police state as long as you can pretend it's
>> 'private'.
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't believe in the concept of "private property" say so.
> But don't pretend that everybody has the same opinion as you.
> 
> I am aware, of course, that SOME anarchists oppose the idea of
> private property.  See 
> http://www.infoshop.org/an-anarchist-faq-b-3-why-are-anarchists-agains
t-private-property/
>
> 
> 
> I consider that essay foolish, because it pretends that there is a
> valid distinction between two forms of property:
> 
> 
> "B.3.1 What is the difference between private property and
> possession?
> 
> Anarchists define /â??private propertyâ??/ (or just /â??property,â??/ for
> short) as state-protected monopolies of certain objects or
> privileges which are used to control and exploit others.
> /â??Possession,â??/ on the other hand, is ownership of things that are
> not used to exploit others (e.g. a car, a refrigerator, a
> toothbrush, etc.). Thus many things can be considered as either
> property or possessions depending on how they are used." 
> ==================== You will also notice that in that essay, the
> author grandly used terms like "anarchists believe" and "anarchists
> define".  One of the most foolish forms of debate is that in which
> a party effectively tries to define his position to be true, or his
> opponent's position to be false, or make grandly sweeping
> statements that over-state or mis-state reality.  Pretending that
> no possible anarchist can believe in private property (including by
> conveniently defining it away) is nonsense. I consider there to be
> a major problem with that stance:  What is the alternative?  If
> there is essentially no private property, then the most obvious
> alternative is collective ownership.  But that implies the need for
> a big, controlling, and ultimately abusive government.  But
> really, that's not surprising:  The label "anarchist" is more than
> occasionally used by people, describing themselves, who really want
> to set up a big, abusive, controlling government.  They just find
> the term "anarchist" and "anarchism" to be stylish.
> 
> Jim Bell

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQGcBAEBCAAGBQJatDN1AAoJEPn/Y5FXPbRCzTsMAI8rVe/HkMcaqUK4cuSNUGn8
CZ0ErN1R9lJSWsfZ26Ah5hheMQ34xDQZiOgBvnuvd5kl9w02yZ/SVfF132pQxInO
aGMiwQK1hxAnYgdw6kGFAEWCTzmxv8HPuu5W1KE3KI7gnitKZvRwlWhZnxRgnRdF
m6iswwkxk1CIP9MOfm3cIreV7I75fqhI5mubsVvPRmHfHomND2a8jSm72xu+UwrC
GzdI7GSALZnIGLO0cxuo7h+pB3iqNTPhg7NqW2DeTZNznOEPOLuHYTQySalk7FSv
0jdfeqNLxaZQEBKQfnB4hL8dDPWoJjlwhwLKMZgJaCXQTJKMAARbVQ2LNwYe6PLw
4OzO+WyPG6vRgyLMnPUdILEGRFbmhb/TMeu91mSH5N7ms3RcoFLkdj7/+suSWyS/
kPXenLhehYFST5XXND3gc+5txKctYc2BZj8JUi9a+Ddi5iY35bjCOiR9QEeYV/Qy
2Wxy8Ws+34e2zcAKeu0yRy8LBfcILFAoOKzzLrJs+w==
=CjVf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----