RE: Simplify laws: No Victim, No Crime

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Simplify laws: No Victim, No Crime

in philosophy •  8 years ago 

What you're suggesting is that petitioning the gang will work.

Actually I am not. That is what you are assuming I am suggesting. Your assumption would be wrong. Yet this is okay because we are not mind readers.

I am suggesting that I survive and I help other people that are in the throes of the gang learn and wake up. You see I KNOW from observation time and time again just saying "You are wrong! Stop!" has virtually no effect on your target except maybe to make them think you are an arrogant nut job. So I don't approach it that way. I approach it like I said as laying down stones. I do not approach it as MY PATH is the way. I approach it as laying down stones that people can choose to follow or not and with the gradual introduction of the idea they become receptive to what you are saying.

The problem here is you are preaching to the choir. I already get that. I follow the works of Larken Rose, and other who speak much the same as you.

I get it.

Yet they also don't reach everyone. Larken and myself spoke once and he admitted his method doesn't reach everyone. There are many paths. I have mine, you have yours. I believe our desired destination is the same. How we believe we should travel to get there differs.

I am not saying you are wrong, and I am not saying I am right. I am telling you there are many paths. Unless you are a person who has an omniscient view of the future then you can't really know the outcome of the path anyone (including yourself) chooses to walk.

As far as denouncing its illegitamacy... I do so frequently. I even did so in this article. Yet I personally don't think the flipping the switch and simply yelling "it is wrong" will meet the reception we need to start pushing people along a path towards that final destination. You apparently disagree. That is fine. Walk your path, and hopefully we get there or help the future get there closer. You leading some people that are receptive to your path, and me leading those that are receptive to mine, and sadly we likely both will miss some.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I understand now, I got the impression that you were advocating for better laws as a way to affect freedom. I don't think it's about reaching everyone, the gang has legitimacy because of the majority aren't questioning their legitimacy, so anything that makes people question that is essential to change.

Nah... the simplifying laws was but a stone in the path towards eliminating them.

I doubt you instantly understood anarchy, voluntaryism, etc. You likely took a path to it.

Ron Paul lead me to Libertarianism and I started learning. The over time debating and getting beat up on reddit someone invited me to r/anarcho-capitalism and I remember thinking "I'm not an anarchist", because I still only knew the propagandized version of that word. Then I learned more.

So I do not expect people I talk to to GET IT immediately, and there is still a lot I am GETTING all the time too. :)