No?

Society's opinion.

No, its not

No the states

How so/

It's society's opinion.

We elect those people to put those laws in place

It's society's opinion

No its the majoritys opinion

which leads to tyranny of the majority

The majority IS society.

whatever u wanna call it its evil

So should we rule by minority instead?

I request you demonstrate this Puma, because you can have roads without the taxation system or in a limited degree.

Toll systems, Toll Booths, Taxation based on elected apportionment if it's in the top 5 issues..

Yeah, basically before the rather illegal 16th amendment was passed and the fed reserve rose in that same year, which were cofacters in starting the great Depression my dad was born during the time of, but that's another story for a later period

We had that once

It's called oligarchy

No we should rule as individuals

in anarchy

So have tyranny by the mob

Otherwise known as the majority

how so?

@LordCaledus We should rule by votes, apportionment, self-ownership, and through individual liberties..

That is literally what you always get without a state. The majority rule by mob rule

We would have enforcment agencies to uphold our rights

Not necessarily

It's majority rule either way

One is just less shitty

if anarchistic societal law structure were done well enough, democracies would be prevented

The enforcement agencies will enforce the will of whoever pays better

^

See: Blackwater.

Which is gonna be the majority

No you would choose which rights you want to be enforced and it would be mutiplied through out the country

Natural selection will push for more charitable ones over time if the people like them enough due to their own self interests influncing the choice and social darwisnism coming along

How would you do this?

it is possible

^

WHO chooses what rights?

The majority will choose

"We" is very... opaque.

With anarchy you cant enforce your sets of beliefs on others