Spawktalk Makes a Liar Out of Me (sort of)

Video this is a response to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcFTS0XovMM

Text of this:
http://fringeelements.info/post/3257520363/response-to-spawktalk-text-to-a-video

Facebook page!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fringe-Elements/139741252702924

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Spawktalk
• fringeelements
• anti
• statism
• again
• private
• defense
• agencies
• law
• war
• reformation
• of
• states

[thatkamikid]

What if one person from a authoritarian legal agency calls the cops for someone doing drugs when their legal agency says it's O.K.?

[fringeelements]

Laws need to harmonize, legal agencies have protocols, common law. They work it out.

Also, it's highly unlikely that a legal agency would proclaim it to be illegal to do certain drugs over all of the former US. More likely there would be some town that banned it, and if you did drugs in that town, well... oh well.

[AtheistAltar]

I think Spawk is trolling us. How can you become an anarcho-capitalist and then be convinced it would fail by saying, "one of the PDAs would turn into a state!"?

[fringeelements]

That's all me!

[thatkamikid]

@fringelements

Well, not a moral code because I'm a emotivist but I wanted to.I'm doing that to everyone I meet today.

[thatkamikid]

@fringeelements

I'm sorry you might hate this but I'm required by my moral code to say I love you today.I love you and I hope you have a wonderful life.

[fringeelements]

The difficulty in raising an army applies to both sides. The main mechanism for preventing legal agencies with intolerable laws is that those agencies won't be able to harmonize, making their members de facto outlaws for most of the people they come into contact with.

[smashedsaturn]

I personally believe in a minimalist federal government slightly smaller than under the articles of confederation, that is extremely limited, and the states would essentially become legal agencies with a geographic monopoly

[smashedsaturn]

@fringeelements

But then where will the legal agencies get the money to raise an army, as you outlined in the defense section any LA that raises an army will be not attractive to members and then loose the revenue to raise the army, I agree with you on most of your points, but this is one i just cannot seem to grasp,

[fringeelements]

Lots of scenarios that depend on the depth and breadth of the opposition to the peculiar agency. If the other legal agencies place a general outlaw the peculiar agency, then if the peculiar agency ignores this then people may or may not organize to militarily stop what they deem offensive in the peculiar agency, and the peculiar agency may or may not resist that military action, and one side or the other may win. Pretty obvious.

[fringeelements]

Legal agencies will have to harmonize to the extent that's what consumers demand. Similar to states doing that, except that these aren't geographic monopolies and individuals can switch between them as easy as they can switch between phone companies, so we can be virtually certain that it would be much smoother than the protocols for inter-state disputes.

[smashedsaturn]

Another dispute I see in this system is say a legal agency (LA a) has the age of consent at 11, a historically common age, but because of this child sex trafficking and child pornography as currently defined would be legal in LA a. This would undoubtedly scar many children being exploited by individuals for profit. How would other legal agencies stop LA a from harming children.

I find it hilarious that I am arguing to the left of someone for once in my life; excellent videos, some great points.