Teacher fired for breaking up fight.

[abandonconflict]

These are the arguments from people who supposedly believe in the principles of liberty. Talk of liberty is meaningless when you don't ever mention rights.

Meanwhile, private interests are increasingly attacking rights and liberties.

 

[abandonconflict]

In a free society you would be able to have your system but not impose it on others that will leave you alone if you leave them alone.

I knew that this argument was coming. It's another common ancap fallacy. First off, what you call a free society is actually not free (if you are describing voluntaryism) except for the ever shrinking few people who have property. They have plenty of freedom. The rest have a choice between working for them and starving.

However, if within the context of a large area where voluntaryism is the established order, a community were more equitably organized, the serfs from among the rest of the land would--by necessity--encroach.

You see, if a land baron of anarchocapitalist design had no excess of serfs working his land, the serfs would see that he could not simply replace them. They could become unruly or even revolt, cast him down and take the land, to distribute more equitably among themselves. In short, it would require only solidarity.

A neighboring manor (since we're describing a greater feudalist society) would then see that the serfs have it much better in the manor with no lord.

They would pour in and learn that they don't need lords. The spread of socialist fervor would be such a threat that the lords and landbarons would be forced to employ great armies of knights and constabulary authoritarians to stop the peasants from casting them down.

 

[UncleBuck]

hey rob, when a racist business owner kicks a black person out of their gas station, who is initiating aggression?

also, how many historians share your view that denial of service to blacks in that fashion caused no harm?

thanks again, been waiting forever for you to answer two very simple questions, ya old racist sack of shit.

 

[Doer]

Actually those "leaders" are supposed to be our SERVANTS, but I think we all forgot.

Not ro me. I said they are just people that want to. We can't make them so they are not exactly in servitude. In fact we elect those that try for it, to be beside the law, officers of the law, and makers of law.

It's a dirty job.

 

[Harrekin]

Definately no boner materials here...

Where's Finshaggy these days?

Hopefully he's still whoring his sister out...

 

[NoDrama]

hey rob, when a racist business owner kicks a black person out of their gas station, who is initiating aggression?

also, how many historians share your view that denial of service to blacks in that fashion caused no harm?

thanks again, been waiting forever for you to answer two very simple questions, ya old racist sack of shit.

Who is kicking who out? Denial of service doesn't mean someone is being removed from the premises. Why can't you admit that the only way for you to win an argument is by defeating the arguments that you yourself made up and not the ones actually presented?

 

[UncleBuck]

Who is kicking who out? Denial of service doesn't mean someone is being removed from the premises. Why can't you admit that the only way for you to win an argument is by defeating the arguments that you yourself made up and not the ones actually presented?

so do you agree with rob that denial of service to blacks caused no harm, contrary to every single historian ever?

 

[NoDrama]

so do you agree with rob that denial of service to blacks caused no harm, contrary to every single historian ever?

I am certain denying service such as medical attention or food and water to an obviously starving and thirsty person would be harmful. Denying someone a dingdong or refusing to cut their lawn, not so much.

But any racist with a brain would use some other excuse for denial of service so that no unwanted attention came to them. Its really just that easy to be a racist I guess.

 

[UncleBuck]

I am certain denying service such as medical attention or food and water to an obviously starving and thirsty person would be harmful. Denying someone a dingdong or refusing to cut their lawn, not so much.

But any racist with a brain would use some other excuse for denial of service so that no unwanted attention came to them. Its really just that easy to be a racist I guess.

so overall, did the denial of service to blacks at gas stations, lunch counters, hotels, salons, repair stations, and elsewhere have a harmful effect?

don't be a cowardly pussy like the racists are known for being, just answer the question.

 

[UncleBuck]

Denying someone a dingdong or refusing to cut their lawn, not so much.

and again, do you honestly think that was the extent of what blacks in the south faced before civil rights was passed?

are you that stupid? or did you just want to belittle the adversity that they faced?

which is it, stupid or belittling?

 

[sheskunk]

Looks pretty fair to me.

 

[Harrekin]

Looks pretty fair to me.

Why do the minorities get coloured water?

Extra fluoride?

 

[OddBall1st]

so overall, did the denial of service to blacks at gas stations, lunch counters, hotels, salons, repair stations, and elsewhere have a harmful effect?

don't be a cowardly pussy like the racists are known for being, just answer the question.

Ok, I just got up off the floor, Thanks a lot Harrekin !i


Buck, good to see your chores are done I hope.

Yes dude it caused lots of personal and National harm. For quite some time too. But look where it`s gone. Take a close look at the "Gangsta Rap Movement" Songs and albums galore that contain the "n" word in every other line. I mean they blast it out loud driving down the street, over the radio it sounds horrible with all those beep outs. Why do the radio stations beep out the "N" word buck ?
The "N" word is now being exploited by the Black Gangsta move. They are making millions and millions selling records to the young Brother up an coming. It`s now a word that the Black man can use daily or hourly and if the White man or Asian man uses it......the Black man cries.

The Black man cries buck. Now why is it Buck that this is common in all States and accepted as well but if the White man dare say the "N" word, the Black man cries ?

When you get done with that one, maybe you can give us a word that if the black man uses in song and language, it will make the White man cry too.

Money, money, me, me, my, my with I, I and mine flooded throughout their songs, and it`s not about you and I,....it`s about making the Black man cry !i ......Right ?

 

[OddBall1st]

Imagine if Van Halen or Miley Cirrus came out with songs that had multiple "N" word usage ?

 

[Doer]

WE consent to be governed and now look what happened.

 

[Rob Roy]

hey rob, when a racist business owner kicks a black person out of their gas station, who is initiating aggression?

also, how many historians share your view that denial of service to blacks in that fashion caused no harm?

thanks again, been waiting forever for you to answer two very simple questions, ya old racist sack of shit.

I think you might not know what ownership means, since you don't the difference between indifference and actionable harms.



When a racist business owner or a non racist business owner "owns" something what doe the term "ownership" mean?

It means that the person that owns something is the person that sets the rules for the thing owned. Otherwise they don't own it.

When a group of people under color of law granted by a coercive government take control over a persons property, THAT taking could be determined as the beginning of the aggression or if it isn't....NOBODY really owns anything and coercive government simply grants privileges of tenancy.

I think our different points of view arise from the following;

I do not grant exceptions to a coercive government to take away a persons right of ownership.
You do. You share that belief with prohibitionists, slavers, and floor shitters. They and you, share the same philosophy, that some people have a right to control others or their property. You can't get around that.

By the way, did you know only thru government protection was racism perpetuated so long? No, you didn't know that.

Oh and about the "sack of shit" thing. I can explain, I rarely eat at fast food places but the other day I stopped in at Wendy's, I think I stepped in something smelly. Can you believe it, some douchbag shit right on the floor! Some people just have no respect for other peoples property, know what I mean?

 

[abandonconflict]

Just another example of the structural violence inherent to capitalism.

 

[UncleBuck]

I think you might not know what ownership means, since you don't the difference between indifference and actionable harms.



When a racist business owner or a non racist business owner "owns" something what doe the term "ownership" mean?

It means that the person that owns something is the person that sets the rules for the thing owned. Otherwise they don't own it.

When a group of people under color of law granted by a coercive government take control over a persons property, THAT taking could be determined as the beginning of the aggression or if it isn't....NOBODY really owns anything and coercive government simply grants privileges of tenancy.

I think our different points of view arise from the following;

I do not grant exceptions to a coercive government to take away a persons right of ownership.
You do. You share that belief with prohibitionists, slavers, and floor shitters. They and you, share the same philosophy, that some people have a right to control others or their property. You can't get around that.

By the way, did you know only thru government protection was racism perpetuated so long? No, you didn't know that.

Oh and about the "sack of shit" thing. I can explain, I rarely eat at fast food places but the other day I stopped in at Wendy's, I think I stepped in something smelly. Can you believe it, some douchbag shit right on the floor! Some people just have no respect for other peoples property, know what I mean?

still too cowardly to answer the questions, i see.

 

[Rob Roy]

so do you agree with rob that denial of service to blacks caused no harm, contrary to every single historian ever?

Causing a harm? Okay you cram a gerbil up somebodies ass against their will. That is an actionable harm. You acted out in an aggressive way against a person that had not aggressed against you.

Your gerbil buddy calls and says he wants you to gerbilize him and it will be your fault if he can't come to your property and get some of that Uncle Buck love. You say not tonite, I have a headache. You expressed indifference. If your gerbil buddy comes over anyway despite your wishes, HE is creating the harm. You simply wanted to be left alone and remain indifferent. His unmet lust and blueballs is not your problem. He doesn't own you or your property.

Causes are generally things that are created by an actionable act, not a non act or an act of indifference. My failing to bring you a steaming shit burger from Wendy's is not causing you to starve. Your needs being met or not met are not the responsibility of others, they are your responsibility, race is not the issue.

The issue is who can claim a moral right to force another to interact with them if that person does not want to?

You say government should be able to make people associate, I disagree. If they have any valid role it would be to keep people from FORCING associations, not being indifferent.

Also, despite your claims, a person can be an advocate of leaving people alone and not forcing associations on them and not be a racist. That would be me.

However, in your case it is a bogus claim to say you are okay with forcing some people to use their property in ways they do not want to and still be an advocate of property rights or non-aggression. You keep trying to put things in a racist perspective, when the circumstances of protecting a persons right to not associate doesn't have to be motivated by race. Even if it is motivated by race, it doesn't matter. Racists as despicable as they may be, still have the right to enjoy their own property and not be made to use it in ways they do not want to.

 

[Rob Roy]

Just another example of the structural violence inherent to capitalism.

I don't defend the present system of capitalism as it is not a free market and is heavily regulated by parasites etc.

I think that dog tried to hump my leg once.