Why the fuck can't statist's wrap their head around the NAP?
Are statist's essentially braindead?
Why the fuck can't statist's wrap their head around the NAP?
Gavin Ramirez
Other urls found in this thread:
Brayden Lewis
Because not all of us get to live in a comfortable upper middle class style, and have never seen a serious crime in our lives.
There is a reason the first thing humanity did was form tribes. Nature is an enemy, but mankind is a greater enemy.
Jace Cox
My neighbor is playing extremely loud music every night that keeps me from sleeping. I asked him to turn it down, but he said fuck you. What can I do about it within the NAP?
Wyatt Hill
>He still doesn't get it
Brayden Cox
The NAP is subjective.
"Don't initiate force."
"Why not?"
"Because the NAP says so."
UPB is objective.
"Don't initiate force."
"Why not?"
"Because it is not a universally preferable behaviour, the initiation of force can never be morally right."
You can of course physically initiate force, but you will always be morally wrong.
Which implies someone would be morally right in demanding reperations for any damages caused by the initiation of force.
Mason Diaz
Oh my god you really have no fucking clue
Acting within the NAP he wouldn't ever initiate force against you in the first place
Gabriel Ramirez
let the sleep deprivation accumulate, have some sort of accident at work or something. Sue neighbor for damages.
Aaron Barnes
His noise is polluting your property. If you have asked him to turn it down he is intentionally violating your property rights.
Joseph Gonzalez
>Which implies someone would be morally right in demanding reperations for any damages caused by the initiation of force.
How the fuck did you get to there?
Jaxon Nguyen
And how do you purpose we make the billionaire and savage alike follow this principle?