Message from @AsianMessiah
Discord ID: 475065971850215424
That's all unnecessary overhead. What's the point of it?
Just print a lawbook.
would they need enforcement though (Executive)
People use private arbitration all the time, and when are you ever dealing with a federal entity in law?
ICE? an example off the top of my head of america
IDRK im not american
Border patrol?
Yes i guess so
So would you agree with the Saga period icelandic model of libertarianism where laws were decided by the state but they would needed to be enforced privately?
idk what that is, but sure. Common law, and common defense.
so a legislative branch only and border patrol?
Why even have a branch? Seriously?
just a placeholder
Why would you want a state to have a monopoly over these services?
Because then someone else could arbitrarily institute strange laws where they see fit, or hold parties accountable more stringently than others.
It'd turn into a codified 'one law for you, one for me'
People would have to deal with multiple law codes for different circumstances
I can understand that, as well as border patrol
How would they be funded?
It's like asking "Why should a culture have a monopoly on language?"
What's to fund? It's a document. Who funds the constitution?
No i meant border patrol, also would the law makers not want salaries?
There's never a need to create new laws. It's just a bureaucratic cesspit of self-interest. Also, local ordinances are still a thing.
Border patrol is a completely voluntary force. The monopoly on force at the border is held in-common.
good talk
ππ»
Border Patrol and the Military is Voluntary, but a salary is needed to keep them, and keep loyalty and prevent fraud.
As well, the 'Government protects property rights'. That incudes cops. Because you can defend your own, but what about when you are at work? Cops are there to aid with burglaries as well. And yes, Cops would want a salary as well.
The NAP is a fallacy, that is devoid of human nature. Just as Communism is.
Oh, this applies to federal governments only. You can keep your local cops, guaranteed.
And the NAP isn't a 'law' or any sort of 'legalism', it's a political philosophy that you apply to things.
It's step 1 in forming any policy:
"If I do X, am I aggressing against someone else? If so, how can I adjust my actions to prevent that?"
The NAP is a logical extension of Liberalism and Natural Rights.
My dick Will extend inyo ass
Good luck jamming it in there first
nice
<:cleanyourroom:429612328192049152>
Jordan joining too?
Nicer
Only issue is NAP ignores human nature. In the ANcapian form without a government/cops/ect. Human nature says, "Will it harm someone, probably. Do I want/need that item for survival. Yes. Fuck it."
Or just to 'have' more
No one disagrees with you
It's not supposed to mimic human nature. Why would it? It's a *principle*.
Anti-racism ignores human nature. Should we dispose of that?