NOS4A2

To be fair, it was a shit question based on a false analogy.

That’s exactly the line of reasoning used to justify the state persecution of Assange and Snowden. The government’s criminality and murderous barbaris...

That they are using the overly-broad world war 1 era law used to justify jailing whistleblowers and critics of the government is enough for me to know...

Why is it against the law to posses declassified documents?

None of this has been proven and all of it is without precedent. None of us have seen the affidavit. So your claim he broke the law is without merit, ...

Probably because a monopoly in trade has nothing to do with a monopoly on violence.

An Atlantic article. Nice. Here’s a NYT article.

Can you arrest a police officer or any government agent and jail him for committing violence? You cannot. The people or institution that claim the mon...

Those are crimes, though. You’d be tried and imprisoned should you commit that violence. You’d be tried and imprisoned by those who have the monopoly ...

The president can declassify what he wants. He’s the commander in chief. Yes, I believe it was politically motivated, because they know people such as...

According to his defense he had a standing order to declassify documents so he could take them for work at Mar-a-Lago. The FBI suspiciously waited unt...

Which sort of violence can you do?

What else can it be?

Yes, the monopoly on violence is seized and held through violence, essentially. I’m not sure might equals better, in this instance. No, Amazon does no...

If what is my point?

It’s gained the old fashioned way: by brute force and conquest. It’s maintained and made legitimate by law, for instance the “use of force” doctrines ...

Collectivist groups? I’m not so sure about that. Band societies, maybe, most of them kin.

It’s a document dispute about the National Archives. And if there are classified materials involved the president can declassify whatever he wants.

What I see is two-tiered justice. No FBI broke into Clinton’s house with guns drawn when she stored classified info in her house and destroyed evidenc...

Imagine if Trump’s DOJ raided Biden’s house in the lead up to the midterms. He was impeached for simply asking Zelensky to look into claims about Bide...

Trump was called a fascist at the mere suggestion of investigating Biden or Clinton. They are everything they accused him of.

No such situation was forced upon me. I don’t think remaining in the womb is a preferable existence.

No one forces me to work, though, except the state. Some of my time and effort is stolen from me. I’m not sure that is the case with what you’re talki...

I like working. Like you said, without it I die. I can use my myself to sustain myself. It’s amazing when I think of it.

All of which I learned from individuals. I have never met the collective, let alone learned anything from it.

I’m reading what you wrote. We’re talking past each other. I’m arguing about moral behavior; you’re arguing about moral outcomes. Like I said, I think...

There is a lot to be said about it, but one thing is for certain in my mind: the existence of a “collective” can be seriously questioned. It’s abstrac...

I am dense, I guess. I can’t see how voluntary, consensual cooperation, whether in the market or elsewhere, is not moral behavior. Moral people purcha...

Sorry, but it is moral, right, proper, and virtuous conduct to pay someone for services rendered and to abide by voluntary and mutual agreements. It i...

The “market” isn’t a human being. It doesn’t make moral considerations, so we agree. I don’t know how we move from that to the argument that the fruit...

Has my labor and wealth not paid for such “benefits”? That the slave benefits from the services provided to him by his master does not alter the injus...

First it’s the market doesn’t take into account moral considerations, now it’s the market doesn’t result in “overall just outcomes”. What state has ac...

Good and sober points.

But they are not party to the contract.

I am only saying it is wrong to take the fruits of someone’s labor, not that good statists cannot voluntarily fund the state and its efforts.

People take into account moral considerations, so your market claim is nonsense, worth ignoring.

And? They are not a party to the contract.

I cannot nor can anyone else because the state has acquired all power to make decisions in those ventures, even if in most of those cases the contract...

No it isn’t.

Your mistake is that you believe only the state can lay asphalt and build bridges and protect our dealings. Consenting parties in the transaction.

You repeating it doesn’t make it untrue, either. Do you really think it is just to take the fruits of someone else’s labor without their consent?

The rest of my quote magically disappears.

It is unjust to take the fruits of someone else’s work and effort for your own benefit. I have the right to my income simply because it was given to m...

But it was offered to me and given to me for the services my employer and I both agreed upon.

It was their property. One edict was even called “Decree for the Reporting of Jewish-Owned Property”. Of course, the Nazis would lay claim to it shoul...

So the capital levy on Jewish wealth imposed in 1938 proves that it wasn’t their property after all?

I haven’t quite worked out a theory of property, but I suppose it would be on the Lockean side. Is your theory of property one of government dictate?

Right, the government declares it can legally take my money, and it is theirs, therefor they are not taking my money. You probably work for the govern...

You could be right. Communal living wouldn’t allow the sort of power imbalance and organized exploitation present in modern states.

I didn’t think I’d have to explain why theft was wrong. I’ll pass, either way.