Message from @Nerthulas
Discord ID: 634935233451524097
alcholism in children depends on the child
even the ***libertarian scholars*** don't make the ridiculous claim which you make
and they give the exact reasoning that I do
they agree that it would be conceptually impossible
prohibition increases prices, so will lower consumption necessarily
by at least some level
it certainly will not raise consumption
Honestly almost nobody understands libertarianism. I bet that a good 90% of this discord server has no clue what they are talking about when they advocate for or criticize libertarianism. All they can likely do, whether effective or not, is battle with libertarians on specific issues without ever reaching the underlying principle of libertarianism and debating that itself.
To summarise, 5 years of alcohol prohibition in Canada lead to a reduction by two thirds in public intoxication and related criminal activity, convictions by an equal amount and lead to the closure of three quarters of all breweries in the country.
Just 5 years
Nice
@Nerthulas Dude just read the damn book lol. If it's so wrong you shouldn't have an issue proving so.
@TheUserNameofPeace shinsekai yori is pretty heavy though. If you want something lighter try gto (great teacher onizuka)
I have already proven so
and you don't even know if the book makes the claim that you make
I think it would raise the potency and subsequent danger of the substances it is prohibiting.
it probably does not
libertarianism is a means in itself just like every other ideology which is why its a joke to engage on its underlying principles
There are still many cities and towns in Canada called 'dry towns' which effectively uphold alcohol prohibition laws in the country to the present day
those are not equivalent
Hundreds
to get rid of the rats, just release snakes
- ancapism
Even though the national prohibition has been lifted
it serves no greater purpose other than wealth production
@Leaf I mean, that's fine. Why couldn't you just try that instead of doing that on the federal level. And why would you assume Libertarians would oppose that?
The federal government did do that
I mean, keep dry towns.
and libertarians would oppose it because it literally infringes on public freedoms
individual freedoms
It dosen't
I don't care about your freedoms I care about the well-being of my people
It's purely voluntary association. Have you read what Hoppe wrote on on contractual convents?
no, a dry town is not a voluntary association
Why is the federal government distinct from the municipal in this regard
it is a government which passed a law
They did exactly the same thing and represent the population in exactly the same sense
it has nothing to do with voluntarism
the law is enforceable by state power