Archate (new word)

in anarchy •  2 years ago

Archate (ark-ate)

verb

to initiate force; to use violence against someone who isn't being violent; to start the fight; to throw the first punch; to attack without a credible imminent threat of being attacked; to bully or govern.

From "arch(ós)" leader, king, ruler , and "-ate", the exercise of such a function

Forms- Archate, archation

I am an anarchist. I do not archate, nor do I support those who do.

"No human being has the right, under ANY circumstances, to archate, nor to advocate or delegate archation."

Of course, since the Zero Aggression Principle (linked above) isn't a "thou shalt not" to be applied to others, but is instead a promise from me to you, letting you know what to expect in dealings with me, you are free to archate, but you are stepping outside what you have a right to do if you choose to do so, and in that case anyone has the right to defend themselves from you. No job or position can give you the right to archate, because such a right doesn't exist and therefore can not be delegated to anyone.

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 like your thinking. I agree, people shouldn't exercise the right to archate. However, technically speaking, the gift of free will is the right to do whatever you want, even if it's to start a war. The path to overcoming archation must therefore begin and end with free will, meaning people must choose to transcend it. I believe we are on that path, and even though it doesn't always feel like we're moving forward, I think we always are. One can't unsee truth, and consciousness is evolving.

·

You define rights differently than I do.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have a right to do it. If it violates another person's equal and identical rights, you have no right to do it. All rights are actually the right NOT to have something done to you. You have a right to own and to carry a gun because no one can have a right to prevent you from doing so. You have a right to not be raped and murdered because no one has a right to rape and murder. Those positive rights to violate others can't exist. They are imaginary and would cause disaster if they were widely believed in. Unfortunately, they are also the foundation of the belief in "authority": the Most Dangerous Superstition.

And, you may be right about free will. I believe if free will exists, it is due to quantum uncertainty. If it doesn't, then you may be destined to be an archator, and I hope your first victim is destined to kill you in self defense so your path is a short one.

·
·

Yes, to all of that. You just showed me the Golden Rule in the form of a Voronoi diagram.

I have no interest in archation, nor fascism, nor authoritarianism. I support your definition of "right" (as a noun). Who enforces such a right? It cannot be enforced. We must each take it upon ourselves to see its value.

·
·
·

You are responsible for "enforcing" your rights, through acts of self defense. You aren't obligated to defend yourself, and you'll have to decide when to let violations slide.

·
·
·
·

I wasn't thinking of "enforcing" that way, but this makes perfect sense.