Do not dare to point out that without government private security is just a personal army for oligarchs (The wealthiest of course being leftists) and that in his utopia warren buffet and bill gates would probably have already wiped out the right wing and created a socialist state.
If you were to point out that private armies are no better than the current system you would be an anti intellectual, so do not do so.

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 6 2020 02:33am

Childish fantasy.

No, private security is not limited to just being a personal army for oligarchs.
Your indulgent ignorance of economics is showing again.

Of course that is not to say problems cannot arise or that factions could not fund immoral forces.
We already see that now with governments across the world.
Alternatives to the state are not a promise of utopia.
This does not disqualify private and voluntary security from being a good and obvious alternative, nor does it lay credence to the nonsensical claim that private persons engaging in security and defense acts are merely an extension of the state.


In the event that government abolishes police in a state, similar to what is being suggested in MN,
Do you really think private security services and people voluntarily coming together to defend their community is an impossibility and only dystopian outcomes are possible?
Or are you committed to portraying liberty in a ridiculous and dismissive light through arrogant and undeserved posturing and pomp, influenced by a lifetime of state propaganda and noncritical thinking?

Private security and armed civilians already play large roles in society.

Interesting.

Can you let me know the names of PaRD posters, particularly those on the left, whom you share dissimilar views with AND for whom you still maintain a "benefit of doubt" that they may be interested and capable of understanding?

Without a state whoever has the most money has the most guys, i mean only in literally every situation this has ever happened in, be it kings, queens, barons, duchies, robber barons etc etc etc
How does LITERALLY ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY equate to a fantasy to you?

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 6 2020 03:10am

It depends on the day and topic, but its slim pickings around here.
Im way over my quota for exercises in futility.

I carried on for a bit with you and rightly declared victory when it was clear you couldn't back up a ridiculous claim and didn't accept it.
That doesn't mean I won't engage in the future or on different topics.

Someone like PF will occasionally settle down and be receptive to a point.

I see where you are trying to go with this, but leftists swearing off reason and critical thinking in favor of emotion, statheism and performative outrage is not a fault of my own.
Thats generally why they are leftists in the first place and is emblematic of the modern left.

During cow boys era where people in isolated farms could be massacred to take their lands without even an investigation ?
While mega cities / suburds where non-existent ? You are sawing the branch you are sitting at.

Money is a medium of exchange.

One person does not have it all.

People have a variety of motivations.

Falsely Conflating "all of human history" with your childish dystopian fantasies is a logical fallacy.
Whoever had the most money was not the sole determinate of power throughout history.
Nor did one person having the most money preclude poorer people from defending themselves and others.

I dont have time to teach kindergarten at the moment. Try to glean some meaning from my statements if you can.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Jun 6 2020 03:23am

I think you're deferring to being over your quota on exercises in futility because there is no meaningful list or even small number of PaRD posters that you can name.

he wuz a gud boi

he dindu nuffin

Generally the only time the person with the most money was challenged military in history it was a) some one with similar wealth or b ) someone he or she gave power to that then betrayed them.
You can call it childish yet you are literally unable to provide a single example in human history where the wealthy have not had the majority of the power, because YOU are the one with childish fantasies here, life just does not work out the way your insanity thinks it will.
I falsely conflated nothing, and using fancy words does not make you any less wrong, i gave a number of examples and you refuted nothing, just resorted to childish insults, which is EXACTLY what literally every person here expects from you.
People having money LITERALLY has on MANY MANY occasions precluded poorer people from defending themselves, disagree?
Get on a plane RIGHT NOW in 2020 go to tibet and tell them they have no problems anymore you have formed a militia for them and you are ready to help them take on china.. PROBLEM SOLVED, libertarian genius right here.

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 6 2020 04:54am