I don't believe there are any legitimate justifications for believing a person has the right to archate. I am told this makes me a "purist". I don't see that as a bad thing.
Yes, in some cases (pushing someone out of the path of a bus, trespassing to rescue a child who wandered onto private property and got trapped or hurt, etc.) I think you probably need to go ahead and do what you think is necessary under the circumstances, and accept the consequences, but that's different than saying you have a right to initiate force or violate property.
But in many cases, such as with governing others-- personally or by imposing a State on them-- you have neither the right nor a "need" which can excuse you. You need to be shamed if this is what you advocate.
However, purist that I am, I probably won't do much beyond disagreeing with you in most cases. All bets are off if you credibly threaten so that I feel the need to defend myself (or others).
Minarchists give me a sour stomach. But as long as they keep their filthy governing hands off of me and my property, I probably won't lift a finger against them. Most of their victims also believe in governing others, and often, believe in doing it even harder. There are consequences for believing governing others to be a legitimate human endeavor, and sometimes they are unpleasant, but if that's what a person believes it isn't my place to "rescue" him from his foolishness.
So, really, other than hurting minarchists' feelings by pointing out where-- and why-- they are wrong, I won't do anything to them. I don't even believe in punishment. But the way they squeal, you'd think I was proposing setting up re-education camps to make them think correctly. It's kind of funny, considering they, not me, are the ones willing to use violence against the non-violent and against people who are violating no one's property. Projection must be a horrible experience.
.
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com.
Donations and subscriptions are always appreciated!
