The state should never initiate force! So...
Don't allow leftists to play games with definitions! Some of the libertarian-leaning leftists at this forum will try to redefine "left-wing" back to its original defition (Third Estate, limited government, free-markets, laissez-faire reforms, etc.). Fine! We non-leftists can't stop them from using their own personal definitions; they can use whatever labels they want to describe any concept they want.However, they have the audacity to then use their personal definition of "left-wing" (remember, the original definition, which is no longer valid) to prove that modern leftists are more libertarian than modern rightists! They will say that libertarianism is "inherently leftist" (again, using the original, no longer valid definition), and use that to insist that we should prefer and side with modern leftists over modern rightists.
Question their motives.
Minarchist. I'm anarchist in mind and spirit, but a minarchist on pragmatic and strategic grounds since I think true anarchy is impossible (not logistically, i.e. what can be done, but emotionally, i.e. what will be accepted).
"He that struggles with us strengthens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper." Edmund Burke
Maxpot, I think it all depends on the definition of "government".
If you say, "let's keep the government but remove its ability to initiate force", people are much more receptive!
Ego: Maxpot, I think it all depends on the definition of "government". If you say, "let's keep the government but remove its ability to initiate force", people are much more receptive!
Yes, and I'd be fine with a cosmetic veneer of a "government" satisfying (some) people's need for a sovereign. But this seems to be more than most anarchists are willing to accept, hence my acceptance of the label "minarchist".
maxpot46: Ego: Maxpot, I think it all depends on the definition of "government". If you say, "let's keep the government but remove its ability to initiate force", people are much more receptive! Yes, and I'd be fine with a cosmetic veneer of a "government" satisfying (some) people's need for a sovereign. But this seems to be more than most anarchists are willing to accept, hence my acceptance of the label "minarchist".
That's a semantical trick I use sometimes. When I'm among people who believe in non-aggression but are unable to accept anything they percieve as "anarchistic", I use the word "government" to describe what is actually free market protection and arbitration. And that's not really incorrect, either. The concept of "government" is older than the state. In its original sense, it refered to the navigator of a ship, not the ruler of a society.
Then I let them figure out the implications of this "voluntary government". I stop referring to it by that name, and call it defense/arbitration service instead. Sometimes they balk, other times they decide they agree with the idea, at least in principle. At the very least, for those who are willing to think]/i] about the idea, it culls those who reject the very idea of non-aggression rather than renounce their god, the state.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
Anarchist . Also in philosophy. But do have national security reservations for other non libertarian peoples peace
Democracy is nothing more than replacing bullets with ballots
If Pro is the opposite of Con. What is the opposite of Progress?
I'm a Danno - er, other.
Dunno which label suits me - I believe that informed consent should rule any human relationship, with some very limited exceptions. I lean strongly towards libertarian, but believe that government has purpose and function. I came here primarily to clarify and refine my ideas about economics, but stumbled across the forums, and expect I'll be annoying people right and left.
The avatar graphic text:
"Are you coming to bed?"
"No, this is important"
"What?"
"Someone is wrong on the internet."
maxpot46: Minarchist. I'm anarchist in mind and spirit, but a minarchist on pragmatic and strategic grounds since I think true anarchy is impossible (not logistically, i.e. what can be done, but emotionally, i.e. what will be accepted).
This is exactly what keeps me from being an anarchist...
...And nobody has ever taught you how to live out on the street, But now you're gonna have to get used to it...
Twirlcan: I am a fifth level Half-Elf Anarchist.
lmao
But to answer the question, hmm let's see... paleolibertarian tory anarchist misanthrope with monarchist sympathies.
I HATE PAPER
Radical philosophically-conservative free market social anarcho-autaurcho left-right-and-around-once-more anarchist without (too many) adjectives
My personal website & blog is at http://groups.msn.com/DennisLeeWilson and my graphic designs, including the “NEVER FORGET” on my avatar, at Artemis Zuna Trading Post
*For truth in labeling about “minarchy”, see the discussion thread on this subject at http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/1102.aspx?PageIndex=1
NEVER FORGET is available at http://www.cafepress.com/ArtemisZuna
Individualist, sovereign, free-market capitalist, objectivist. Though to "civilians", I just default to anarcho-capitalist or market anarchist.
The state won't go away once enough people want the state to go away, the state will effectively disappear once enough people no longer care that much whether it stays or goes. We don't need a revolution, we need millions of them.
I am ultimately anarchist, though for strategic purposes I do tend to argue on minarchist terms with outsiders of the cause. I do see problems with anarchy in our current society...meaning if the government was suddenly abandoned at this moment people would not be able to deal with it and chaos would ensue, likely followed by the creation of another government (probably worse). To me the way to true, enlightened anarchy can only lead through minarchist channels. So, lets achieve the small government first, then we can take the last, little step.
But, yeah, among similar minded, Anarchist.
paleolibertarian, voluntaryist, anarchist, individualist, individualist anarchist, capitalist, anarcho-capitalist are all acceptable labels.