"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics).

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows?

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
>

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon Bruce,

By the way, just to clarify, Bob had responded to a post where I tried to
explain the anarchist position on limited government. His response was a
quip, stating that anarchists were unwilling to compromise. I challenged
him on this, and then he went on to say that he distinguishes between
anarcho-capitalists and other anarchists. So, then, I question the
relevance of his original response to the ongoing debate (because, if he was
talking about left-anarchist then his post was completely irrelevant). So,
if anything, the only pedantry involved is by part of Bob, not mine.

Sincerely,

Jonathan

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon Bruce,

By the way, just to clarify, Bob had responded to a post where I tried to
explain the anarchist position on limited government. His response was a
quip, stating that anarchists were unwilling to compromise. I challenged
him on this, and then he went on to say that he distinguishes between
anarcho-capitalists and other anarchists. So, then, I question the
relevance of his original response to the ongoing debate (because, if he was
talking about left-anarchist then his post was completely irrelevant). So,
if anything, the only pedantry involved is by part of Bob, not mine.

Sincerely,

Jonathan I will stick by what I said.
 
I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.
 
And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.
 
But a 'minarchist' is just another term for a bare-bones
libertarian with emphasis on the 'min'.
 
The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 11:06 PM


Bruce,

Excuse me?  What name did I call Bob, other than Bob?  I am questioning his intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical [sic] games" have I been playing?  Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found your characterization to be true.  By the way, I have sat down and spoken with Tibor Machan (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation — natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market anarchist, is vice president of!  Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about?  I'm not sure you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and approach the topic with a bit of humility.  Finally, I find it amusing that you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon Bruce,

By the way, just to clarify, Bob had responded to a post where I tried to
explain the anarchist position on limited government. His response was a
quip, stating that anarchists were unwilling to compromise. I challenged
him on this, and then he went on to say that he distinguishes between
anarcho-capitalists and other anarchists. So, then, I question the
relevance of his original response to the ongoing debate (because, if he was
talking about left-anarchist then his post was completely irrelevant). So,
if anything, the only pedantry involved is by part of Bob, not mine.

Sincerely,

Jonathan I will stick by what I said.
 
I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.
 
And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.
 
But a 'minarchist' is just another term for a bare-bones
libertarian with emphasis on the 'min'.
 
The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 11:06 PM


Bruce,

Excuse me?  What name did I call Bob, other than Bob?  I am questioning his intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical [sic] games" have I been playing?  Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found your characterization to be true.  By the way, I have sat down and spoken with Tibor Machan (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation — natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market anarchist, is vice president of!  Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about?  I'm not sure you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and approach the topic with a bit of humility.  Finally, I find it amusing that you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

I will stick by what I said.

Ironic that you consider anarchists to be stubborn.

I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.

Bruce, let's go over the present debate one more time. I was discussing
with Geof the anarcho-capitalist take on limited government, and their
general willingness to accept limited government in lieu of anarchy as a
better alternative to big government. Bob responds with a quip claiming
that "anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning
cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them" (am
I wrong to be surprised that anybody agrees with this characterization?). I
then ask Bob what anarcho-capitalists do this, and he responds that he
wasn't referring to anarcho-capitalists. Giving Bob the benefit of the
doubt, what point was he making that was relevant to my response to Geof?
Please, point it out.

And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.

What's your point? How does this reflect on what I said? You claimed
Machan wouldn't sit down with people like Jesse and I. I just proved you
wrong. Your relations with Machan, for all intents and purposes, are
irrelevant, since you are not an anarcho-capitalist.

The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

I would argue that minarchists are the majority amongst libertarians,
because it fits most well with non-anarchist libertarianism (i.e. reduction
of force to an essential minimum — where government protects individual
rights, where the market could not [this is the basic Randian position, in
any case]).

On the other hand, care to substantiate your claim that "[a]narchists sit
with Starchild and the wierdoes"?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon Bruce,

By the way, just to clarify, Bob had responded to a post where I tried to
explain the anarchist position on limited government. His response was a
quip, stating that anarchists were unwilling to compromise. I challenged
him on this, and then he went on to say that he distinguishes between
anarcho-capitalists and other anarchists. So, then, I question the
relevance of his original response to the ongoing debate (because, if he was
talking about left-anarchist then his post was completely irrelevant). So,
if anything, the only pedantry involved is by part of Bob, not mine.

Sincerely,

Jonathan I will stick by what I said.
 
I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.
 
And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.
 
But a 'minarchist' is just another term for a bare-bones
libertarian with emphasis on the 'min'.
 
The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 11:06 PM


Bruce,

Excuse me?  What name did I call Bob, other than Bob?  I am questioning his intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical [sic] games" have I been playing?  Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found your characterization to be true.  By the way, I have sat down and spoken with Tibor Machan (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation — natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market anarchist, is vice president of!  Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about?  I'm not sure you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and approach the topic with a bit of humility.  Finally, I find it amusing that you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

I will stick by what I said.

Ironic that you consider anarchists to be stubborn.

I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.

Bruce, let's go over the present debate one more time. I was discussing
with Geof the anarcho-capitalist take on limited government, and their
general willingness to accept limited government in lieu of anarchy as a
better alternative to big government. Bob responds with a quip claiming
that "anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning
cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them" (am
I wrong to be surprised that anybody agrees with this characterization?). I
then ask Bob what anarcho-capitalists do this, and he responds that he
wasn't referring to anarcho-capitalists. Giving Bob the benefit of the
doubt, what point was he making that was relevant to my response to Geof?
Please, point it out.

And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.

What's your point? How does this reflect on what I said? You claimed
Machan wouldn't sit down with people like Jesse and I. I just proved you
wrong. Your relations with Machan, for all intents and purposes, are
irrelevant, since you are not an anarcho-capitalist.

The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

I would argue that minarchists are the majority amongst libertarians,
because it fits most well with non-anarchist libertarianism (i.e. reduction
of force to an essential minimum — where government protects individual
rights, where the market could not [this is the basic Randian position, in
any case]).

On the other hand, care to substantiate your claim that "[a]narchists sit
with Starchild and the wierdoes"?

Sincerely,

Jonathan The anarchist do see it as black and white, but of course less government is
better than more.
working on the philosophy of libertarianism is a proper direction to take
with the big Ls and the small l's because it's the root of the matter that
needs stricken. Otherwise it will be very easy to submit to statism as a
means of solving problems created by government without even realizing it.



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Geof Gibson <> wrote:

> "Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy
> can
> be regulated through democratic politics). "
>
> I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it
> seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government
> are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.
>
> At least that's how their point comes across to me.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:
>
> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy
> can
> be regulated through democratic politics).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe.

"Even
anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
be regulated through democratic politics). "

I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.

At least that's how their point comes across to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:

> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy can
> be regulated through democratic politics). Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not *accept* government of *any* size. My
point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is
better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not
*exactly*what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued
that any scaling
back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless
society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing
work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller
government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to
establish an anarchic society.

Sincerely,

Jonathan The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept government of any size. My point is that, nevertheless, they recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if smaller government is not exactly what is being sought. For example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society. With that said, it follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.


Sincerely,

Jonathan who cares bob, those are leftists anyways. We are conservative's and we use peace unlike them.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Bob Giramma <> wrote:

From: Bob Giramma <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 9:18 PM




The problem is that anarchists are often out in the
streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone
who disagrees with them.  They're like fingernails on a chalkboard. 

 
Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are
more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government
conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive
reactions.
 
But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the
liberty test.




From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 3:53 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe

Geof,

Yes, it's true, anarchists would not accept
government of any size.  My point is that, nevertheless, they
recognize that smaller government is better than bigger government, even if
smaller government is not exactly what is being sought.  For
example, Murray Rothbard argued that any scaling back of government is
desirable, even if the end-goal is a stateless society.  With that said, it
follows that anarchists are perfectly willing work in conjunction with
constitutionalists towards establishing a smaller government, even if over the
longer-run their true intentions are to establish an anarchic society.



Sincerely,

Jonathan

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking
windows? From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:50 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


What anarcho-capitalists are on the streets burning cars and breaking windows?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

You write,

I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.

Where was this distinction when you wrote this?

The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the
lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who
disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with
tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a
civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.

It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist
libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out
anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of
your post?

Sincerely,

Jonathan I guess Wikipedia is sloppy:

"Some scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism, while others do. Some socialist anarchists argue that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism due to their belief that capitalism is inherently authoritarian. In particular they argue that certain capitalist transactions are not voluntary, and that maintaining the capitalist character of a society requires coercion, which is incompatible with an anarchist society. Moreover, capitalistic market activity is essentially dependent on private ownership and a particular form of exchange of goods, selling and buying."

However, the article goes on to note that Rothbard claimed anarcho-capitalism is the only true form of anarchism, since other forms of anarchism (which he implicitly acknowledges) can't exist in steady-state. I know plenty of anarcho-capitalists who can present libertarian ideas to non-libertarians very well. I also know many anarchists who don't call themselves anarcho-capitalists who don't come across well to non-libertarians.


From: Jonathan Catalan
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:09 PM
To: San Diego Libertarian Chat
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe


Bob,

You write,


I distinguish anarcho-capitalists from anarchists.


Where was this distinction when you wrote this?


The problem is that anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them. They're like fingernails on a chalkboard.

Whereas non-anarchist libertarians like myself are more likely to work with tea partiers and other limited government conservatives, who behave in a civilized manner more likely to get positive reactions.

But just like anarchists, I score 100% on the liberty test.


It seems to me that here you distinguish only between "non-anarchist libertarians" and "anarchists". If you really meant to leave out anarcho-capitalists, this was quite a sloppy post!

So, if you really didn't mean anarcho-capitalists, what was the point of your post?


Sincerely,

Jonathan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were *clearly *(it's a
matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all)
using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists". So, I'm not
sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just
conclude that your post was a cheap shot? Otherwise, I repeat, what was the
point of your post? Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan

>
> I certainly understood Mister Giramma's postings.
 
And based on how 'Anarchists' treat other people, who
they support and what their key issues are, it does
seem the folks like Tibor McCann are going to sit
with me and Bob, not you and Jesse.
 
You, dear Jon, are playing semantical games
and name-calling and one can only speculate
that you don't feel your argument is good enough
to carry the day on it's own.
 
Am I wrong?

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 10:40 PM


Bob,

But you were responding to a series of emails that were clearly (it's a matter of looking at the context in which the word was used, after all) using the word "anarchist" to represent "anarcho-capitalists".  So, I'm not sure what you are trying to establish by splitting hairs, but can we just conclude that your post was a cheap shot?  Otherwise, I repeat, what was the point of your post?  Who was talking about left-anarchists?

Sincerely,

Jonathan




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

Excuse me? What name did I call Bob, other than Bob? I am questioning his
intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical *[sic]* games" have
I been playing? Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided
context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both
anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found
your characterization to be true. By the way, I *have* sat down and spoken
with Tibor *Machan* (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation —
natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly
false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market
anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government
libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market
anarchist, is vice president of! Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about? I'm not sure
you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that
Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and
approach the topic with a bit of humility. Finally, I find it amusing that
you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented
was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon Bruce,

By the way, just to clarify, Bob had responded to a post where I tried to
explain the anarchist position on limited government. His response was a
quip, stating that anarchists were unwilling to compromise. I challenged
him on this, and then he went on to say that he distinguishes between
anarcho-capitalists and other anarchists. So, then, I question the
relevance of his original response to the ongoing debate (because, if he was
talking about left-anarchist then his post was completely irrelevant). So,
if anything, the only pedantry involved is by part of Bob, not mine.

Sincerely,

Jonathan I will stick by what I said.
 
I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.
 
And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.
 
But a 'minarchist' is just another term for a bare-bones
libertarian with emphasis on the 'min'.
 
The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Jonathan Catalan <> wrote:


From: Jonathan Catalan <>
Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] What anarchists believe
To: "San Diego Libertarian Chat" <>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 11:06 PM


Bruce,

Excuse me?  What name did I call Bob, other than Bob?  I am questioning his intentions with his post. Furthermore, what "semantical [sic] games" have I been playing?  Bob was responding to my post, and in that post I provided context.

By the way, I have met and spoken to a variety of libertarians — both anarchists and those who prefer limited government — and I have never found your characterization to be true.  By the way, I have sat down and spoken with Tibor Machan (and, yes, we disagreed on the topic of conversation — natural rights [me being a moral nihilist]), so your assumption is blatantly false (also, strange that Machan would speak in a seminar led by market anarchist Tom Palmer, and strange that so many limited government libertarians are part of an organization in which David Boaz, a market anarchist, is vice president of!  Yes, I'm speaking about CATO).

Bruce, if I may ask, what is my current debate with Bob about?  I'm not sure you're even aware of the topic (you are seemingly oblivious to the fact that Bob never directly addressed my response to Geof).

So please, stop putting words in my mouth, get off your high horse, and approach the topic with a bit of humility.  Finally, I find it amusing that you accuse me of insecurity with my argument, when the best you presented was an accusation of ad hominem where there was none.

Sincerely,

Jon

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Bruce,

I will stick by what I said.

Ironic that you consider anarchists to be stubborn.

I think you were playing a semantical game with Bob when
you tried to make a case that his point was invalid when
he didn't quite label each micro-fraction of shades of
anarchists quite as you demand.

Bruce, let's go over the present debate one more time. I was discussing
with Geof the anarcho-capitalist take on limited government, and their
general willingness to accept limited government in lieu of anarchy as a
better alternative to big government. Bob responds with a quip claiming
that "anarchists are often out in the streets with the lefties, burning
cars, breaking windows, and insulting everyone who disagrees with them" (am
I wrong to be surprised that anybody agrees with this characterization?). I
then ask Bob what anarcho-capitalists do this, and he responds that he
wasn't referring to anarcho-capitalists. Giving Bob the benefit of the
doubt, what point was he making that was relevant to my response to Geof?
Please, point it out.

And I've known Tibor for a long time.
I'm sure I've spent more time with him than you as well.
And I've managed never to get into a disagreement with
the man, either.

What's your point? How does this reflect on what I said? You claimed
Machan wouldn't sit down with people like Jesse and I. I just proved you
wrong. Your relations with Machan, for all intents and purposes, are
irrelevant, since you are not an anarcho-capitalist.

The minarchists sit with the Libertarians and the
Anarchists sit with Starchild and the wierdoes.

I would argue that minarchists are the majority amongst libertarians,
because it fits most well with non-anarchist libertarianism (i.e. reduction
of force to an essential minimum — where government protects individual
rights, where the market could not [this is the basic Randian position, in
any case]).

On the other hand, care to substantiate your claim that "[a]narchists sit
with Starchild and the wierdoes"?

Sincerely,

Jonathan The anarchist do see it as black and white, but of course less government is
better than more.
working on the philosophy of libertarianism is a proper direction to take
with the big Ls and the small l's because it's the root of the matter that
needs stricken. Otherwise it will be very easy to submit to statism as a
means of solving problems created by government without even realizing it.



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Geof Gibson <> wrote:

> "Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy
> can
> be regulated through democratic politics). "
>
> I'm not convinced of this. Based on what anarchists have been arguing, it
> seems to me they see the issue as black and white, all sizes of government
> are coercion and therefore no amount of government is acceptable.
>
> At least that's how their point comes across to me.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 18:30, sdlibchat- wrote:
>
> Even
> anarchists accept that a smaller government is more desirable than a bigger
> government (even if they reject the concept that the size of bureaucracy
> can
> be regulated through democratic politics).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the Sdlibchat mailing list. Go to http://listserv.sdlp.org/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org to subscribe. Shawn,

Please see my responses interspersed with your comments below...

On Aug 5, 2012, at 7:35 PM, Shawn Fox wrote:

> You seem to think that anarchists like Jesse want to be working within the party. Why do you think that?

Because some anarchists *do* belong to and work within the LP. The "like Jesse" modifier may have been misleading; what I meant was simply anarchists.

> By the way, you are wrong in what you just wrote. Candidates aren't endorsed automatically. To be endorsed, a motion must be made at a convention or executive committee meeting. The party doesn't endorse everyone who runs for office as a registered libertarian. Getting on the ballot doesn't mean that you were endorsed by the party. You should know that. It just seems that way since we typically don't have as many candidates.

I do know that, and did not say that candidates were endorsed automatically.

> For someone who writes so kindly about anarchists you certainly seem to like the idea of control.

I like the idea of having a Libertarian Party that is strongly libertarian. I guess that is "control" in a sense, but only in a similar sense to saying that I would like a skyscraper to be built on a solid foundation and to be pleasing in its architectural design.

> I find that to be rather amusing. Whenever I speak of control of anything the anarchist response is typically something like, "Geez you don't have any faith in individuals do you?". If you believe that anarchists are trying to protect the party, then I would pose the same question to the anarchists. Why don't they have any faith in individuals? Why do they want to control people so much?

These questions are very strange to me. You seem to be suggesting that in order to be consistent, anarchists must advocate that any organization they are involved with must have no standards whatsoever with regards to who its members are or what it advocates. Perhaps I'm missing your point.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))



> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Starchild <>
> To: San Diego Libertarian Chat <>
> Cc:
> Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 17:33:45 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Sdlibchat] Why have a political party
> Geof,
>
> The nominating process may impose a sort of *de facto* ideological standard (let's certainly hope it does!), but I'm talking about actual written rules which would set a consistent minimum standard, like the written rules we have about which presidential candidates are allowed to participate in the televised presidential debates at our convention (this year it was only two, which set a very bad example/precedent imho, but that's another topic).
>
> Moreover, of course, not all Libertarian Party candidates are nominated in this fashion. To become the party's representatives on the ballot, some need only be registered Libertarians who file to run for office. Legally, we don't always have any control over this, however I think having some ideological standards about who is eligible to receive the party's endorsement and support would tend to discourage candidates with significantly un-libertarian views from trying to represent us, at least to some extent, and that would be a good thing.
>
> I agree with you that anarchists in our movement like Jesse can serve a valuable role for the LP even from outside the party. However, I think they can serve an even more valuable function within the party, because "the nature of politics" to which you allude is to incentivize principled, ideological political parties to water down their platforms, messages, and standards in order to seek votes, money, and power, and anarchists in the LP help provide a bulwark against this corrupting influence of the electoral system.
>
> Love & Liberty,
> ((( starchild )))
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2012, at 12:02 PM, Geof Gibson wrote:
>
> > Interesting comment SC.
> > This gets to the heart of the matter Rothbard address in the Democracy essay to which Jesse linked.
> >
> > Isn't the nominating process the part uses to choose candidates the "ideological standard" of which you speak? If enough of the membership thinks Bob Barr or Gary Johnson or WAR are "pure enough" and nominates on of them then so be it. Is it correct or "fair" to have a standard which may be "too radical" for the majority of the membership?
> >
> > I submit that the LP as a political institution well NEVER be "radical enough" by the nature of politics. That will always leave Jesse "politically homeless." I do not think that is a bad thing. I think Jesse provides as valuable a service from the outside. His anarchist perspective is a good thing for LP members to have as an example of one form of political philosophy. I find it useful to remind me that Anarchism has more to it than the Leftist violent anarchism which receives far too much attention in the public eye.
> >
> > On Aug 5, 2012, at 10:18 AM, sdlibchat- wrote:
> >
> >> And I think there ought to be some ideological standards to run for office as a Libertarian with the LP's blessing, or to hold internal office in the party. I'm open to debate as to exactly where that line would best be drawn, because I realize that any particular standard would inevitably be somewhat arbitrary, but I do not personally think, to name the most obvious example, that Wayne Allyn Root is libertarian enough that he should hold party office or represent the party as a candidate.
> >
> > Geof Gibson -

_______________________________________________
Sdlibchat Chat mailing list
Need to update your subscription? Click here:
http://box352.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/sdlibchat_listserv.sdlp.org

Interested in joining the Libertarian Party of CA? Download the following
application and mail the completed form with your annual dues payment to the
indicated address.
http://www.sdlp.org/sites/default/files/sdlp_downloads/jointheSDLP.pdf

Interested in making a donation quickly and easily via PayPal? Click here:
http://www.sdlp.org/contribute

Thanks for your support!
)