It means that there is NO authority. If there’s no authority, the only thing that determines whether or not a group or individual can wield force (rightly or wrongly) without consequence (which there must be for wielding it wrongly) is whether or not they have the might instead of whether or not they have the right.
If you stop your blind and knee jerk defense of it and think about what I’m saying you’ll come to see that it’s true.
I think we are talking at cross purposes. What is the nature and source of authority? How does government acquire authority over individuals within its territorial claim? If might or numbers makes right, you have no rational basis for your argument, and you are merely appealing to the status quo.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Authority means having the final say/action. There’s proper authority (when the final say is inline with protecting rights) & improper authority (when the final say isn’t)
There can be no proper authority when everyone is sovereign unto himself because the only thing determining whether an individual has the final say when wielding force is whether or not he has the might, rather than whether or not he is right.
(If you want to continue the convo you can find me on minds.com under the same handle. Steemit sucks for discourse because of the whole running out of Steem power thing)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You contradict yourself. Rights are an individual's sphere of authority over their life, liberty, and property. These are reciprocal and universal standards for all individuals. Each individual has the final say within their respective spheres. Reason, not some outside individual's arbitrary opinion, is the limiting factor. How do governments get the authority they claim?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You’re the one contradicting yourself. You have final say over yourself, not others, which is why an unbiased, objective third party is needed to intervene if and when individuals overstep their bounds. You speak of reason and yet you ignore it, choosing to support the irrational. (This probably won’t post because of the stupid Steem power limitations and if does I probably won’t be able to respond for a long time.)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What is the source of the authority claimed by governments?
Yes, we need a third party to resolve disputes where people come into conflict, but government is not an unbiased, objective third party. A government is by definition a territorial monopoly in violence, and government programs are funded by taxation, which is extortion under color of law. Any disputes between a government and its subjects results in a transparent conflict of interest where government claims the power to act as both prosecution and judge. It cannot be a neutral party.
Opposition to tax-funded government monopoly provision of a given service is not opposition to the service in principle. We already have examples of decentralized arbitration systems, and we have examples every day of the abuses committed by the government police and courts in blatant violation of individual authority.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You’re missing the point. That third party (which at least you acknowledge must exist) MUST have a monopoly on law & retaliatory force.
If it doesn’t, you don’t have a third party. You have numerous parties (i.e. various gangs) warring against one another using violence to impose their whims.
The need to prevent that and establish a system that allows individuals to freely exercise their rights is the rationale or reason for such an authority
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I suggest reading Chaos Theory by Robert Murphy or at least this chapter of David Friedman's book, The Machinery of Freedom so we are on the same page. Government services aren't magically immune to economic laws, and instead magnify the failings inherent in trying to disregard them. Security and adjudication are not fundamentally different from other services.
Government doesn't "allow individuals to freely exercise their rights," instead infringing upon those rights as a necessary and fundamental aspectbofnits operatuon, and this does not provide "rationale or reason for such an authority." Governments are various gangs warring against one another and against us.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit