Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian.

5/25/10 2:26 PM

94
Search Home Profile Account

Scott Ferrie Even though Rothbardian-Molinari Liberals and Marxists are NOT Anarchists, both camps have
similar ideas to Anarchism. Common ground can be beneficial for the future. about an hour ago

Wall Info Photos Notes Boxes

Create an Ad
Write something...
Fun Swing Dancing
Tees
Attach: Share

Filters
View Photos of Scott (352) Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense against physical
View Videos of Scott (10) aggression. Any other violence beyond that is unjustified like "defending
private property", "contract enforcement", and other non-defensive
Send Scott a Message
violence. You need to embrace this position or the pacifist position to be Love Swing Dancing? Tell
Poke Scott called an anarchist or libertarian. the world with fun tees,
Yesterday at 10:33pm · Comment · Like stickers and more. Tons
of unique designs
I am a Socialist that would like to Like
Andrew Austin and 2 others like this.
see Capitalism and the State
abolished.
Zac Gochenour So if someone moves to take your stuff,
Buddhist Training
you are supposed to let them? I say defending your
private property is legitimate; to suggest otherwise, I
Information think, simply ignores the reality of incentives and human
behavior.
Current City: Yesterday at 10:46pm
New York, NY
Melinda Foshat It depends on how you define private
Political Views: property.
Discover Buddhist training
Anarcho-Syndicalist, Yesterday at 10:46pm for modern life - Juniper
Horizontalist, Egalitarian, Anti-
is making a profound
Propertarian Patrick Fonce Haney so, two people try to take corn tradition of inner
Religious Views: from the same field... then what? development accessible.
Radical Egalitarian Yesterday at 10:56pm
Like
Jacob Spinney What?! Anarchism is a very simple term;
Mutual Friends translated directly to mean "without rulers." You must be Get the new
wearing some kind of amazing lens to look at the Chrome 5
8 friends in common See All
phrase "without rulers" and divine from that that it
prescribes the ethic that no property is defendable with
force.

Are you really going to tell me that it's perfectly fine for
me to steal all of your possessions and the moment you
Howie Stefan Jared
attempt to stop me from doing so, YOU are the one
Cartnick Molyneux Patrick
initiating force against ME?!
Bowers Faster than ever! Get the
Yesterday at 11:20pm · Delete
newest release of Chrome,
the web browser by
Friends Andrew Austin Jacob, you are attempting to divorce Google.
anarchism the word from Anarchism, the political theory
463 friends See All that has a long history behind this kind of thought. True, Like
there is nothing in the term "anarchism" and its literal
definition of without governance to support this, but More Ads
there is a great deal of support in the history of
Anarchist thinkers who developed a ...
Jim Liberty Shpresa Luke See More
‫ﺃﻣﻞ‬ Clayborn Yesterday at 11:25pm
Kokollari Hopper
Luke Oz Sounds like your confusing property with
possesions they are two distinct things. Anything can be
used and occupied as a possession, given the people
who use and occupy it, but property is inherently
authoritarian and hierarchial concept. Its base is on
Stefan Ben Jim using the initation of force against people who may
Molyneux Woods Davidson decide to manage themselves and deny your ...
See More
Photos Yesterday at 11:27pm

2 of 3 albums See All Luke Oz Plus no one is going to take your house, your
toothbrush or your belongings. This is a fallacious claim,
Wall Photos that begs the question, why would you use force against
Updated 40 someone who was not harming you or anyone occuping
minutes ago the same land you reside upon? It just doesn't make any
sense. Its like saying you can't walk across this area to

[Link] Page 1 of 6
Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian. 5/25/10 2:26 PM

sense. Its like saying you can't walk across this area to
Stuff get to the lake to get ...
Updated on
See More
April 7, 2009
at 11:32pm Yesterday at 11:32pm

Patrick Fonce Haney Luke, why cant they take your

Video house once you leave?
When your not using it?
2 of 7 videos See All Yesterday at 11:34pm

Jacob Spinney I think you are confusing neo-lockean

property rights with some corporatist idea of obtaining
resource monopolies. I think the real question is if you
only have enough food to live off of, is it your ethical
obligation to STILL feed someone who is starving, and
thus sign your own death warrant?
Yesterday at 11:37pm · Delete
Apr 4, 2010 3:34pm
0:03 Recorded about 2 months ago
Luke Oz Because there is certain moral imparitive that
all human beings exhibit, being that of mutual aid. I no
of no person in my community or in the history of my
life who would steal others posssesions unless they
faced starvation and death, which is a unnatural result of
the system we currently live in, not Collectivist
Anarchism.
Yesterday at 11:39pm

Feb 25, 2010 11:36am Luke Oz know*

1:56 Added about 3 months ago Yesterday at 11:40pm

Jacob Spinney LOL. Why do I get the feeling when

Links talking with syndicalists that their vision is a world
where there are no limited resources? Where we can
3 of 1,150 links See All
simply think things into existence? Where all things are
readily abundant? I'm sorry, that world does not exist.
Interview with Joe Peacott,
There will always be limited resources. Because of that,
Individualist Anarchist there will always be coveting. Because ...
4:22pm May 24
See More
Libertarian municipalism - Yesterday at 11:48pm · Delete
Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia Jacob Spinney Because we live in a world with limited
1:01pm May 24 resources, people will have different preferences on how
to use those resources. Some would rather have a cell
Labour voucher - Wikipedia, phone and use a bus. Some would rather have a car than
the free encyclopedia a cell phone. How exactly does your society decide how
11:28pm May 23
to use those limited resources? Majority vote?
Yesterday at 11:49pm · Delete

Luke Oz Your living in a world that is dieing not me. Not

Suggest Friends for Scott because of my ideas, but because of theirs. They who
have established from top to bottom the enslavement of
Report/Block this Person us all.
Remove from Friends Yesterday at 11:49pm

Share Jacob Spinney LOL. How is that in any way a response

to the question I posed?
Yesterday at 11:51pm · Delete

Luke Oz Let me ask you would your prefer working for

a boss or managing your own affairs? Would you like to
do something creative and beneficial to the community,
or would you prefer someone else manage your
community and stop you from making deceisions that
effect you? These are serious questions I asked myself.
Yesterday at 11:54pm

Jacob Spinney We all strive to be our own bosses. But

some of us are simply better at being laborers than
bosses and some of us are better at being bosses than
laborers.
I'm sure all script writers want to be the actual actors in
the movies so they can get the credit. But the simple
fact is that they're better script writers than they are
actors and actors are ...
See More
14 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Your understanding of Collectivist Anarchism is

way off base, and I am aware of rothbard and all the
systems it entails, and believe me their are serious flaws
in its application to reality. The fact is that what your
asking for is not individual liberty at all, but privatized
properterianism for everything. Its not possessions that
are the problem...
See More

[Link] Page 2 of 6
Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian. 5/25/10 2:26 PM

14 hours ago

Jacob Spinney WHAT?! Once again, YOU are the one

advocating that individuals should willfully enslave their
labor to a collective. I advocate that each and every
single human being should own themselves, their labor,
and their property (the product of their labor). If
someone decides that they would rather trade their
labor for money and use that money for ...
See More
14 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Its the same thing that happened back when

we had chattel slavery, back then it was work or get
forced to work, now its work or starve. Its no different
then, and its no different now. Slavery is still slavery.
14 hours ago

Luke Oz Just because I work to get enough money to

own slaves, doesn't mean I am free, it just means I am
free to own others as slaves.
14 hours ago

Jacob Spinney You dishonor the memory of REAL slaves

by referring to employees as slaves. Employees simply
trade their labor for money. They can choose to devote
that money to consumption or capital. A business owner
is merely a former laborer who, instead of consuming,
devoted the product of his labor to investment/capital.
Because he has this capital that he ...
See More
14 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Dishonor? Whoa. If anything I'm praising the

working laborers. They struggled tooth and nail to have
what they [Link] getting way off topic. The dishonor
is claiming that anyone should be your slave. Thats
dishonor. Thats like going home and beating your wife,
and then saying hey kids I had a rough time so I am
going to sell her for money to beat her some more thats
dishonor. Having profit as your incentive is inhuman
man.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Selling and renting off people like animals is

dishonor.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney Let me ask you, if I decided to not work

at all for no particular reason, would your society still
provide me with an equal ration of the resources you
have?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Plus I am a wage slave. How the hell could I

dishonor laborers if I myself am a laborer who is just
defending their right to live, be free and equal? That
doesn't make any sense.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz As for the land being held off its not due to
Collectivist Anarchism, its due to State Capitalism, the
system of coercion and exploitation that I am seeking to
abolish. That enslaves me and everyone.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney In your society, will you feed anyone and

everyone who comes to the door, or will you require for
people (who are capable) to work for their ration card?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz I am not dishonoring myself by omitting the

truth.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney It's a simple question. Will your society

offer free food to anyone and everyone asking nothing in
return, OR will your society have the prerequisite that
people who are capable have to provide some of their
labor to obtain this food?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz The truth is that I dishonor myself by letting

this system continue.
13 hours ago

[Link] Page 3 of 6
Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian. 5/25/10 2:26 PM

Luke Oz Omitting capitalism and statism are neccessary

in this case.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz As they need to be left out. They need to be

abolished.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney ? So you're going to ignore my question

and decide to recite Marx bible verses? Fine.
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz They need not be admitted as anything but

slavery.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Now your calling me a marxist. Wow. No dude.

I place no interest or investment in the state thankyou.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Marxism is a statist idealogy that advocates

using the state or abolish capitalism and then imagines
the state will wither away. I'm an Anarchist I want to
abolish the state and capitalism dirrectly.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney Great, now that we've cleared that up,

can you answer my question?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Your condeluding Anarchism with Marxism.

13 hours ago

Luke Oz People can grow and make their own food. Its a
fact of human nature.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney Yes . . . . But in your lovely syndicalist

society, will you provide free food to anyone and
everyone in return for nothing?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz So that answers your question. I'm not going to

continue the conversation if your keep throwing out that
I'm a marxist, slavery advocate or statist. Because I'm
not.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz It has nothing to do with what we are

discussing, and I wasn't attacking you, I was attacking
the idealogy. This conversation is becoming more and
more insulting.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Rather then thought provoking.

13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney I apologize for insinuating that you were

a marxist or statist in any way shape or form.

Can I have an answer to my question now?

13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz No everything that occurs in a Anarchist

society is for mutual aid and mutual benefit.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney So your society will refuse to give food to

(capable) people who refuse to offer their labor to
society?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Its not free ride and a free hand out like you
get from government systems. It takes work and manuel
labor like anything, but there is nothing stoping
someone from giving without returns. I'm sure it would
happen, but it wouldn't be something absolutely
mandatory.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney So then even your society it is work or

starve, is it not?
13 hours ago · Delete

[Link] Page 4 of 6
Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian. 5/25/10 2:26 PM

Luke Oz No. Because their would be organizations that

would operate in gift economics. So no.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Its not a matter of work or starve, because we

wouldn't force people to work or starve, people would
make the decesions neccessary for the things that effect
them.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney You really think there would be enough

charities in your society who would willingly give free
food to people who can work, but just decide not to and
mooch off the system?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz People aren't going to starve if there are gift

organizations everywhere to turn to.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney In nature, you have to work or starve

(farm/hunt/etc.). In capitalism, that is also the case,
except your labor is able to produce a heck of a lot more
stuff for you than just enough food to live off of. In your
society, that would also be the case, with no free
handouts.
Of course there would be charities to help those in
need. I doubt there ...
See More
13 hours ago · Delete

Jacob Spinney Is it your contention that there will be no

charities in capitalism?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Yeah I do actually. Because I awknowledge the

practice of mutual aid not social darwinism. I don't
believe people are profit seekers, I think people are
social creatures that care for one and another.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Maybe thats hard to believe, but I accept it as

fact of our evolution.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Yes there are charitable organizations in

capitalist economies, but that doesn't justify capitalism.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney You really believe that there are no

people on earth who wish to live at others expense?
That there are no people on earth who wish to enjoy life
rather than work?
13 hours ago · Delete

Jacob Spinney You have to admit you are being

disingenuous with this work or starve tactic against
capitalism, because it applies to your society as well,
does it not?
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Well yes there are, but what is that a bad thing?
Why is work a mandatory demand? Some people in
tribes in Africa haven't worked a day of their lives and
they are happy and content. As an Anarchist I wouldn't
force them to work nor would I deprive them of their
food.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Its not a crime not to work.

13 hours ago

Luke Oz No it doesn't. They have a right to be

primitivist anarchists I support that.
13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney You seem to be contradicting yourself.

Earlier on you stated that your society would not need it
mandatory to feed everyone, even if they willfully choose
not to work. Now you seem to be saying the opposite.

Will your society offer free food, even to those who

willfully choose not to work? I'm not talking about
charities. I'm talking about it being a mandatory policy

[Link] Page 5 of 6
Facebook | Scott Ferrie Violence is only justified in DIRECT defense agains…osition or the pacifist position to be called an anarchist or libertarian. 5/25/10 2:26 PM

that everyone should be feed, work or not work.

13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz Its not a crime to live in the wild, its not a

crime to make your own food and hunt it. Its a crime to
force people to work, and force them out of their food
supply which capitalism does a daily basis.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz No I do not believe in mandatory relations. I'm

an Anarchist.
13 hours ago

Luke Oz Its as simple as that.

13 hours ago

Jacob Spinney You did it again. You acknowledge that

your society would not provide (as an absolute maxim)
free food to people who willfully choose not to work.
Logically, this means that capable people have to work
or starve, even in your society. And you once again
attack capitalism for having this work or starve
mentality and completely avoid the fact that ...
See More
13 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz No I did not say the opposite. I said exactly

that I do not believe in manditory gift, as I don't believe
in manditory obligations to anyone, I'm an Anarchist
specifically an Anarchist of the Collectivist branch. I
mean I have an open eyes view of all the other forms of
Anarchism and I support them. I do not in anyway
support forcing people to work or starve, a person
doesn't have to work and still can recieve material
existence in an Anarchy.
12 hours ago

Luke Oz This conversation is over, you are insinuating

claims that have no basis in reality and making a huge
deal out of nothing, but to shield your form of
enslavement with moral rethoric and nonsense. I'm
done. I don't want people to starve to death. To even
think that sort of thing would exist in Anarchism is
madness and to think I was getting somewhere.
12 hours ago

Luke Oz Nope I guess not.

12 hours ago

Jacob Spinney . . . Now you seem to be contradicting

yourself within the very same comment. In the first half,
you say that it should not be mandatory to give free
food. Then in the second half you say that you do not
support forcing people to work or starve. Hopefully we
can both agree that it's debatable whether there would
be charities who would give free ...
See More
12 hours ago · Delete

Luke Oz I will admit this and only this, nothing is ever

going to be perfect for everyone. Even if some did
starve, I wouldn't argue for mandatory starvation. There
is a big difference between starvation without any way of
stopping it, and mandatory starvation. Your way is
mandatory starvation, mine is only a act of nature. There
you go. Piss off!
12 hours ago

Luke Oz And fuck you capitalist pig!

12 hours ago

Write a comment...

Facebook © 2010 English (US) About Advertising Developers Careers Terms • Find Friends Privacy Mobile Help Center

[Link] Page 6 of 6