Like the Comic? Tip the Creator (BTC): 15N5pDtR98r5oks9wTQBrmV9fkyakQAxu1
Actively Disengaged #57 – The Power of the Dark Side
Comments and Discussion
(13 Comments So Far...)Devan North
I could live with pot, but if the local meth cook sells drugs on my granddaughter’s playground I get to kill him, right?
Who own’s the playground? You? If so, and he trespasses on your property, then you would be justified in retaliatory force.
Ol' Gui
We need to stop spending money that we have to borrow in order to spend. The only entity that can spend money it doesn’t have is the Federal Govt. and that is soooooo not good. Maybe if we paid taxes with drugs it would keep the government wasted instead of wasting and we wouldn’t need weapons to resist tyrants.
Devan North
Okay Seth, and I’m new to this and I find a lot of what I read intriging, even attractive, so understand I’m asking because I don’t know. Where does responsibility for ones actions and the safety of those who can’t protect themselves from predators (like my two year old grand daughter) fall in this whole anarchy thing?
Say Joe-Bob the Meth cook or Jerone the crack dealer is dealing on a public sidewalk ajacent to her playground. I know what the law is now, but what if there is no law? How are such things “handled”?
ActivelyDisengaged
Anarchy is all about personal responsibility. Who’s responsibility is it to protect your grandchild? Yours. You may hire or contract with some other agency to do the actual physical protecting, but the ultimate responsibility is yours.
But it’s in your best interest to act like a civilized human being.
Can you go around putting bullets in people who try to sell your child drugs or give her candy?
First, as Seth stated, you have to define who owns the “public” street (and therefor has the ability to set the rules). I would say that there IS no public sidewalk… i.e, a street that is owned by “no one” or by “everyone”. No such thing. Some person or group of persons own it. They set the rules on whether drugs can be sold there, and what happens to people who break the rules. If there is someone breaking their no-drugs rule, then it’s up to the owners to put a stop to it.
But maybe there is no no-drugs rule. After all, selling drugs is a voluntary transaction between two people, presumably adults. Such a transaction would not be “illegal”, no matter how distasteful it may be to you.
That doesn’t mean, however, that the local meth dealer is free to sell drugs to your daughter against your wishes, no matter who owns the property. The child is your responsibility and under your protection, so if she is getting involved in something that you disagree with, I’d say you have the right to step in and put a stop to it.
But your first course of action shouldn’t be to put a bullet in the drug dealer’s head. Your FIRST course of action should be along the line of “Hey man, leave her alone.” After that, a more forceful “I said step away from the girl.” Followed by “we’re leaving, don’t follow us.” If this person persists, then I’d guess you’re dealing with someone a bit more sinister than a drug dealer. At that point, you may need to initiate some force to put an end to the interaction. You do what you need to do. After the fact, you may have to face some sort of arbitration to decide if the amount of force you initiated was appropriate to the situation. That’s right… “anarchy” doesn’t mean you won’t end up explaining yourself if you decide that someone “needed killin’”.
But what you DON’T have the right to do is interfere with a transaction between two OTHER people that happens to be taking place next to where your grandchild is standing. Under that circumstance, it’s up to you to relocate and express your displeasure with the property owner (who is free to ignore your protests if he wants). It would be hard to explain to an arbitrator how witnessing a drug deal was a clear and immediate danger to your child, for which putting bullets in heads was an appropriate response. Especially when you have the more civilized option of just walking away.
Devan,
In absense of the State, there would be no such thing as government owned property. So, whoever owns that sidewalk next to the playground would make the rules as to who can do what there.
Now, would a school want to operate with a sidewalk that’s dangerous, crime ridden, and drug infested(like many current governments schools/sidewalks)? Likely not. Now it gets a little more technical here, but it would ultimately come down to voluntary zoning, easements, and voluntary agreements between the school and the sidewalk/road owner(s).
If raods/sidewalks were privately owned they would have an incentive to keep things clean and orderly. The ones that do keep things well maintained and such would yield greater business/rent from adjacent businesses than the sidewalk/road owners that did a poor job maintaining their roads.
Devan North
Well, then I guess here’s where I part ways with the idea of total anarchy. I believe in minimum government , self reliance, personal accountability and the existance of Good and Evil regardless of what system a group of people are living under. Maybe that’s why anarchy doesn’t exist anwhere on a large scale, and hasn’t even when there was a large frontier to migrate to when the rules of th eastern towns became too oppessive. I will not accept the idea of moral relativism, and I answer to God, Family, and Tribe. I wish you well.
How’s your tribe working out for you now Devan? Half of the people of your tribe live off of the productive labors of the other half. Half of the people of your tribe want to disarm the productive half.
Anarchism is about choosing who your friends are and not having them imposed upon you. I don’t consider myself an American. What the hell does that mean? Most Americans I don’t have anything in common with. The greatest threat to my life, liberty and property are other Americans.
Devan North
Thank you Seth, for your frank and patient explaination. I believe you have helped me to make an informed decision. By the way, assuming my tribe included all Americans was an assumption on your part. My tribe is doing just fine.
So, then you also want to stop paying federal taxes and obeying all federal law enforcement?
Devan North
The site won’t let me just type “No”, so..”That’s a negative, Ghostrider.” Still, the me from 15 years ago wouldn’t recognise the present day me, so I’m going to keep an open mind and look forward to future Actively Disengaged cartoons.
Fair enough.
blah balah blahsasdad sd just typgint randdsm gobbley gook to satifsty teh censors.
Seth
Brilliant!
Ugg, got a notification my comment was too short. Get rid of that!
Link | Posted by: Seth | January 30th, 2013 at 7:46 pm