I have more logical consistency in my little pinkie fingernail than you have in your whole worthless body.
You're incorrect, and also very stupid. Your GIF is a straw man that is exactly the type of idiocy I was commenting on in my post. Thanks for providing an example of self-defeating anarcho-stupidity! You should change your username to "onlystupidity" ...because being an "all-or-nothing" champion of stupid, incorrect terminology helps no-one, improves nothing, and confuses and divides support for voluntaryism, whether it be "anarchy" or "minarchy" in its ultimate form.
...I replicated your cartoon providing an opposing straw-man caricature of anarchism. Those who are lurking should notice that I didn't claim that there is no legitimate form of anarchy, nor did I caricature "anarchism" as a movement in my initial post. I have simply pointed out the plain truth: Even classical liberals and radical minarchists as intelligent as Milgram, Spooner, Thoreau, Douglass, and Bastiat have all disagreed that anarchism is desirable or strategically likely for periods of greater than ten years.
If they can't settle on "anarchism" as a desirable goal, then there's probably something wrong with the terminology. ...And it turns out, there is. The common man doesn't accept anarchism because he's not good at connecting cause to effect, and he also makes decisions using simple heuristics and a world-view informed by partly-correct government school History classes.
If the common man had any chance of accepting anarchism, I'd step out of the way, and cheer the anarchists who made it happen. ...But he does not, so I will not. In fact, anarchism drives people away from the Libertarian Party in droves, and interferes with bringing new people into the Libertarian Party and small-L libertarian movement. If it didn't, we'd already have seen more major successes from minarchist libertarianism focused around restoring proper jury trials.
I have more logical consistency in my little pinkie fingernail than you have in your whole worthless body.
You're incorrect, and also very stupid. Your GIF is a straw man that is exactly the type of idiocy I was commenting on in my post. Thanks for providing an example of self-defeating anarcho-stupidity! You should change your username to "onlystupidity" ...because being an "all-or-nothing" champion of stupid, incorrect terminology helps no-one, improves nothing, and confuses and divides support for voluntaryism, whether it be "anarchy" or "minarchy" in its ultimate form.
...Of course, that may be your intent.
...I replicated your cartoon providing an opposing straw-man caricature of anarchism. Those who are lurking should notice that I didn't claim that there is no legitimate form of anarchy, nor did I caricature "anarchism" as a movement in my initial post. I have simply pointed out the plain truth: Even classical liberals and radical minarchists as intelligent as Milgram, Spooner, Thoreau, Douglass, and Bastiat have all disagreed that anarchism is desirable or strategically likely for periods of greater than ten years.
If they can't settle on "anarchism" as a desirable goal, then there's probably something wrong with the terminology. ...And it turns out, there is. The common man doesn't accept anarchism because he's not good at connecting cause to effect, and he also makes decisions using simple heuristics and a world-view informed by partly-correct government school History classes.
If the common man had any chance of accepting anarchism, I'd step out of the way, and cheer the anarchists who made it happen. ...But he does not, so I will not. In fact, anarchism drives people away from the Libertarian Party in droves, and interferes with bringing new people into the Libertarian Party and small-L libertarian movement. If it didn't, we'd already have seen more major successes from minarchist libertarianism focused around restoring proper jury trials.