I'd have to see the text and the context of that earlier conversation. I have read quite a bit of additional material in the last 2 or 3 years.BjornP wrote: ↑Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:16 amFife, I remember that in a post of mine (on the DCF, maybe two-three years ago?) I joked that you were an anarchist, and you corrected me that you weren't that much against having a state/government. So I've long assumed you were simply a die hard minarchist, but I've noticed you've been meme'ing and quoting anarcho-capitalists alot these last (one? two?) years. You don't even believe in having a State as a "neccesary evil" anymore, now?
Did your beliefs about the role (or lack thereof) of the State change over the last few years?
"Necessary" or not, the state is an "evil." Violence and theft are evil. I'm not ab initio opposed to the state providing actual public goods, but the burden is on the state to show me that something is an actual public good. The burden gets higher and higher on what's "necessary" as I get older and more exposed to the evil the state initiates. Please remember that I've been dunked in a pretty dense indoctrination tank about the "necessity" and "goodness" of the state for about 30 years. Reality doesn't match up with the classroom, and certainly not the statehouse.
There are lots of smart cookies out there who push the envelope on things like public highways not being public goods, so that makes for good reading for me. I was trained to ignore the Overton Window, I reckon. Muh Autobahn Doe is NOT a proper response to "do we need the state to move around freely?"
Once "X is impossible without the state" as an unsupported assertion is presented as an argument, I'm not interested.