You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Anarchy and Dealing With The State
That's like saying it requires imposition to resist a mugger. That doesn't make any sense.
Nothing in a voluntary society precludes people choosing associations of which I disapprove, provided they leave others alone.
Let's put it like that, what happens if I do not want to? If I take a rifle and I prevent you from forming a free society, would you do nothing or defend yourself? no matter the result one way or another there would be imposition.
You're equivocating initiatory aggression and resistance to said aggression. The aggression is imposition. Defense against it is not. Telling you to stop imposing on others is not itself an imposition.
Imposition definition: a thing that is imposed, in particular an unfair or unwelcome demand or burden.
What happens if your model of society is an imposition for me? Yes your rules do not like me?
How does my demand that you not initiate aggression against me either directly or by proxy (in other words, impose upon me) create an imposition on you?
I am not trying to build a model of society, I am trying to describe how society works in spite of imposition by statists.
Ok, I'll try to explain myself as best I can. I am a supporter of free association and free societies, however, there are people, for example, who want a strong, large, planned and bureaucratic state, or they impose themselves, using force or not, or simply people like I, we want a small State and more freedom we do it. For them a model of free life, is a way of imposition to which they will always resist, and for others like me, the all-powerful states represent an imposition. Why imposition? simply by abiding by the norms that society dictates. No model of society is exempt from antisocial behavior.