Political Theory

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Spideynw — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:19:25 GMT

Anonymous Coward:

From the wikipedia;

As a social-economic system, slavery is a legal institution under which a person (called "a slave") is compelled to work for another (sometimes called "the master" or "slave owner"), under rules typically referred to as slave codes.

You know, I'm not seeing too much difference between the two.

This is an excellent point.

So, if a slave does not try to run away, does that mean the the slave has "consented" to slavery?

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Anonymous Coward — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:02:25 GMT

Maxliberty:
Can you be free if there is someone in the world who might rob you or harm you?

Free from coercion?

There seems to be a rash of people suffering from the Nirvana Fallacy Syndrome lately.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

banned — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:56:32 GMT

Maxliberty:
Or you have to find ways to resist. You are resigned to your slavery. You are not a free man who has been enslaved, you are a slave who would like someone to free them. A free man who is enslaved is always seeking a way out and believes there is one, a slave who seeks to be free is always at the will of others.

You sound like the randroids.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Juan — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:48:06 GMT

MaxLiberty:
Yes, your idea of freedom is that no person anywhere in the world is trying to restrict you. If one person in the world is trying to violate your rights then you are a slave.

That's a silly strawman. By the way, it's not 'my' idea of freedom, but the libertarian idea of freedom. Or maybe it's petit-bourgeoisie freedom , as the marxists put it ?

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Maxliberty — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:39:41 GMT

GilesStratton:

Maxliberty:
It is always someone else's fault you are not free.

By definition, yes.

Answer my question, can a man in the DPRK be free provided he doesn't not "accept" his position as a slave?

Yes.

Can you be free if there is someone in the world who might rob you or harm you?

Re: You can leave = you consent?

hayekianxyz — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:38:22 GMT

Maxliberty:
It is always someone else's fault you are not free.

By definition, yes.

Answer my question, can a man in the DPRK be free provided he doesn't not "accept" his position as a slave?

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Knight_of_BAAWA — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:37:42 GMT

Maxliberty:
You are slave because you require someone else to free you.

*yawn*

Peddle your holier-than-thou attitude elsewhere.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Maxliberty — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:32:40 GMT

Juan:
MaxLiberty:
You are committed to the principle that the criminals are in control of your life
No I'm not. I'd be quite happy to fight back (instead of fleeing to the middle of nowhere...) if there was at least a small group of people to work with.
When you realize you are in control of your life then you will be free, not without enemies, but free.
Sorry, but you and I are using different definitions of 'free'.
for liberty is, to be free from restraint and violence from others; which cannot be, where there is no law: but freedom is not, as we are told, a liberty for every man to do what he lists: (for who could be free, when every other man's humour might domineer over him?) but a liberty to dispose, and order as he lists, his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property, within the allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be subject to the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own.

Yes, your idea of freedom is that no person anywhere in the world is trying to restrict you. If one person in the world is trying to violate your rights then you are a slave. I am a free man with enemies. I don't have the impossible expectation that everyone will be in perfect agreement.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Maxliberty — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:28:44 GMT

Knight_of_BAAWA:

Maxliberty:
It is difficult under the constraints that you have created for yourself

I didn't vote for the tax laws. Therefore, I didn't create the constraints.

Your holier-than-thou attitude is old.

You are slave because you require someone else to free you. You continue to be constrained because you are unwilling to go where there are no restraints. Your statements continually indicate you are a permanent victim. It is always someone else's fault you are not free. At what point in your life will you be willing to accept responsibility for where you are and what you are doing?

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Maxliberty — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:23:57 GMT

Anonymous Coward:

So if one were to attempt to eliminate of reduce their control they are either free or in the process of becoming free? In other words this makes them no longer slaves?

Like the agorists maybe?

By your reasoning the agorists' desire to live where they are, not pay taxes and attempt to elimimate the coercive power of the State is a perfectly valid form of seeking freedom.

If you had taken the time to read my posts on agorism, I have consistently said that the idea of agorism for greater personal freedom is fine and no "agorist" ideology is required to practice it. Agorism as a strategy to undermine and replace the state with particualar reference to growing the counter-economy is not well founded.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Juan — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:14:10 GMT

MaxLiberty:
You are committed to the principle that the criminals are in control of your life

No I'm not. I'd be quite happy to fight back (instead of fleeing to the middle of nowhere...) if there was at least a small group of people to work with.

When you realize you are in control of your life then you will be free, not without enemies, but free.

Sorry, but you and I are using different definitions of 'free'.

for liberty is, to be free from restraint and violence from others; which cannot be, where there is no law: but freedom is not, as we are told, a liberty for every man to do what he lists: (for who could be free, when every other man's humour might domineer over him?) but a liberty to dispose, and order as he lists, his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property, within the allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be subject to the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Anonymous Coward — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:00:16 GMT

Maxliberty:
I know what coercion is and I know what excuses are as well. You are committed to the principle that the criminals are in control of your life and you are powerless to eliminate or reduce their control. As long as you are convinced of that then you are a slave. When you realize you are in control of your life then you will be free, not without enemies, but free.

So if one were to attempt to eliminate of reduce their control they are either free or in the process of becoming free? In other words this makes them no longer slaves?

Like the agorists maybe?

By your reasoning the agorists' desire to live where they are, not pay taxes and attempt to elimimate the coercive power of the State is a perfectly valid form of seeking freedom.

*Smack Down, Bitch*

Re: You can leave = you consent?

hayekianxyz — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 20:55:21 GMT

I wonder if ML believes the people of North Korea can be said to be "free" as long as aren't "resigned" to the state?

If so, what's the point of fighting the state? You can be free by merely imagining it.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Knight_of_BAAWA — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 20:52:53 GMT

Maxliberty:
It is difficult under the constraints that you have created for yourself

I didn't vote for the tax laws. Therefore, I didn't create the constraints.

Your holier-than-thou attitude is old.

Re: You can leave = you consent?

Maxliberty — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 20:50:56 GMT

GilesStratton:

Maxliberty:
Or you have to find ways to resist.

This is one thing, not paying taxes is something else.

There are lots of people who don't pay taxes. How are they able to do this while you are not?