Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Phillip Rhodes <mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John Berninger wrote:

>>   
> The entire notion of private property requires a civilized society to 
> create necessary preconditions for that concept to be honored. 

I disagree.  A "civilized society" (which we haven't even really
defined) probably helps in maintaining private property.  But
defense of one's own property reduces to the responsibility
of the  individual ultimately.

> Which in 
> turn requires acknowledgement that an individual's desires / opinions 
> may at some point irrevocably conflict with the generally accepted 
> notion of the "greater good", which in turn requires the establishment 
> of some form of authority to 'discipline' the 'errant individual' - else 
> we revert to a case of "What's mine is mine, and what's your is mine as 
> soon as I get around to killing you and taking it."

No, it only means that to the extent that "society" serves to protect
an individual, that society may choose to stop protecting that
individual if he/she decides to secede.  What happens after that
is open to debate.  Maybe the individual is just killed and
has his property taken.  Maybe not.  Maybe the individual
joins another pre-existing society that is more aligned with his/her
views.  Maybe he/she forms a new society with other liked-minded
individuals.


> I can't disagree with the opposition to the Iraq war here, but I do 
> argue that you have the ability to disassociate yourself from the 
> 'system' anytime you want - apply for citizenship in another country, or 
> just move there as an ex-pat. 

I reject the notion that I should have to give up my land, my home, etc.
in order to do so though.  Saying "move to another country" still
doesn't get around the fact that this country, as personified by the
government, has no intrinsic authority to

> Saying the system is based on coercion is 
> also saying that you are being prevented from taking any of these steps 
> at gunpoint, which is simply not true.  By choosing not to take these 
> steps to disassociate yourself from this system, you are acknowledging 
> the limitations the system puts on you as a precondition of accepting 
> the benefits the system grants you, and implicitly agreeing to these 
> limitations.

Umm, no.  That's like saying that if I'm wrongly convicted of a crime
and sentenced to jail, and don't spend my every waking second
trying to escape, then I'm agreeing with my conviction.

> Disclaimer:  All the above is purely my personal opinion, and may not 
> have anything more than a passing resemblance to reality as perceived by 
> the reader.

I think that's true of everything said by all of us. :-)
> 

TTYL,

Phil
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGnN+jdkzqYMZbBuwRAmSNAKDqBkMDEP4Ra/JhxshzIpQdED7YywCg0+YW
LwV3Vs3WkHRRtQGb+qEJGrM=
=4rxM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
begin:vcard
fn:Phillip Rhodes
n:Rhodes;Phillip
adr:;;P.O. Box 16905;Chapel Hill;NC;27516;USA
email;internet:mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk
tel;home:919-928-0236
url:http://www.linkedin.com/in/philliprhodes
version:2.1
end:vcard