What exactly is "initiation of force"?

[Caleb]

yes, but did you notice the little pot leaf next to the popcorn? every batch of popcorn needs some nice, ahem, butter.

that's my little olive twig of conciliation towards denis' latest political activism.

plus, Dale, by your own admission you are migrating more towards in the system activism now.  http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=13285.msg230531#msg230531

[sfchik]

Initiation of force is a term that has multiple meanings, similar to a request to define the word reasonable; each person will have different answers. I believe first I must understand the word initiation.  Loosely defined, this is the person who starts, begins an act upon another.

A person can aim a gun at my head and give me orders, be it robbery or rape, it does not matter; I would feel this is an initiation of force and may react in self preservation. If I make any physical contact with the gunman in the attempt to divert his actions or cause harm, one can say that I am the initiator of force. I would naturally disagree with this because I not only have the right but the duty to protect myself from imminent danger. 
   
I agree with your statement about shoving ones belief onto another, this can be seen as initiation of force. For example: two people arguing over an issue, one person no longer wishes to engage in  discussion however the other person will not quit, I realize one can shut a door, walk away but.....

Ok I completely lost track of my last sentence but can't the government be seen as the initiator of force because all laws are made by the "leaders" with little to no regard of the citizens they impose them on? Sorry I don't mean to answer one question with another but I couldn't help it.

[Lex]

A little ADD there sfchick? I was reading your post with interest and then it suddenly just kindof stopped. Also, I don't think this thread is about government force. It is about force in general and how we as individuals deal with it. Force is force, whether it comes from another individual (burglar) or a group of people (government).

[srqrebel]

I'm not entirely sure that "punishment" for aggression (meaning force used after the fact) is even permissible.

I don't think anyone here believes "punishment" is acceptable. Use of force to obtain restitution, however, is.

Awesome! Regardless of whether I agree or not, THAT is exactly the response I am looking for. Break it down for us, clarify your own version the boundaries of initiation of force.

Seems to me this is a classic case of a popular term that has, up to now at least, served no purpose except as a communication barrier, because everyone thinks the meaning is clear, yet each person holds a different interpretation.

If a term means one thing to one person, and quite a different thing to another, the term has no communication value at all. It is nothing but a barrier to communication.

Alright, time to get off the soapbox... I see Caleb marching resolutely in my direction, and he's carrying a big stick!

[srqrebel]

A little ADD there sfchick? I was reading your post with interest and then it suddenly just kindof stopped. Also, I don't think this thread is about government force. It is about force in general and how we as individuals deal with it. Force is force, whether it comes from another individual (burglar) or a group of people (government).

Just a little background to help put things in context... sfchik is not a freestater, but a personal friend of mine. By her own admission, her dialogues with me had at least a small influence on her views... and it was at my insistence that she came to this forum. In short, she is new to a lot of the ideas and ideology that seem glaringly obvious to most of us.

I am quite impressed that she identified the fact that the government (more accurately, the Authoritarian Model of Government, or AMOG) is a primary initiator of force in our present world. This must be an identification she made through her own thinking, because I do not recall feeding her anything quite that radical!

I suspect the trailing off near the end of the post was not so much ADD as the fact that the term initiation of force can get rather fuzzy when you really stop and think about where it applies.

[Caleb]

Alright, time to get off the soapbox... I see Caleb marching resolutely in my direction, and he's carrying a big stick!

Damn! Where's that Big Stick emoticon when you need it. 

[dalebert]

Damn! Where's that Big Stick emoticon when you need it. 

You're not allowed to use that emoticon, you passifist wuss. 

[Caleb]

 

[d_goddard]

I don't think anyone here believes "punishment" is acceptable. Use of force to obtain restitution, however, is.

Awesome! Regardless of whether I agree or not, THAT is exactly the response I am looking for. Break it down for us, clarify your own version the boundaries of initiation of force.

Ahem, it's in the next post I made, in response to Dale's query.

[srqrebel]

I don't think anyone here believes "punishment" is acceptable. Use of force to obtain restitution, however, is.

Awesome! Regardless of whether I agree or not, THAT is exactly the response I am looking for. Break it down for us, clarify your own version the boundaries of initiation of force.

Ahem, it's in the next post I made, in response to Dale's query.

Oops... I wasn't clear.  The "break it down for us" part was not meant for you, Denis... in fact, you did an excellent job of it, and I was citing your post as an example of just that, for everyone else's benefit.

Sorry for the misunderstanding

[sfchik]

 "In short, she is new to a lot of the ideas and ideology that seem glaringly obvious to most of us.

I am quite impressed that she identified the fact that the government (more accurately, the Authoritarian Model of Government, or AMOG) is a primary initiator of force in our present world. This must be an identification she made through her own thinking, because I do not recall feeding her anything quite that radical!

I suspect the trailing off near the end of the post was not so much ADD as the fact that the term initiation of force can get rather fuzzy when you really stop and think about where it applies." Forgive me, I still can't get the quote thing right and too tired to care right now.

Ok I would not say that I am brand new to the ideas, however I have not spent the time and effort researching the many aspects of this subject as the rest of you have; this does not mean I am clueless about the infringement of our rights and the suffocating actions of our government, simply not as educated as the rest.  Menno, you have not discussed any issue that radical because every time we started on a similar subject we were interrupted.

I did not finish my interpretation of initiation of force, to be perfectly honest I started having a very strong craving for a cig and had to work my way through it, by the time I felt better I had completely lost my train of thought and if I ever get it back I will finish what I started, damn this new thing called oxygen, it causes CRS.

[Jacobus]

...After all, let's assume that you come up with the absolute, objective ethical laws you believe dictate when the use of force is justified or non-justified.  Well then, a government that acts in accordance with those rules of justice would be okay, right?  In fact, that government would be good.

I mean, even if you say "well, only force used in self-defense is justified.  And self-defense is defined as ..." you can come up with some government that is therefore justified in applying force in situations of defense.  If you throw in restitution as being justified, now you've gone ahead and justified not only enforcement officers but court systems as well.

You make some excellent points here, although it seems to me that you are also making assumptions about where I am going with this that are completely incorrect.

I am not willing to tip my hand until I have seen a significant number of direct responses to this question.  The purpose of posing this question is to see just how widespread a specific interpretation of the term "initiation of force" is, before I involve myself in discussing the philosophical/practical side of it.  Perhaps it not such a widespread misconception as I had thought... so I want to get a good feel for how others are interpreting it before going after something that may be a non-issue.

I'm interested to see where you are going with this now.

[srqrebel]

I was hoping to get at least a few more responses

This is the first I've been online in a couple of days... there are other things taking priority for me right now, but I'll be back soon, hopefully

In the meantime, I'd love to hear from more of you guys, as to how you personally interpret the phrase "initiation of force".  Please try to include some brief examples of initiated vs. uninitiated force, like Denis did.

[Eli]

For me, the 'initiation of force' is about the immediate threat of physical harm, (i.e. the mugger pointing a gun at me, or someone swinging a fist at my nose.)  Those are the initiation of force, and merit a forceful response (or perhaps simply make a forceful response morally justified.)  Any other force/fraud/agression can be dealt with in a more constuctive manner.  The initiation of force that can/should be responded to with force are the kinds of events that might preclude an individual seeking restitution in the future.  For example, when you are pointing a gun at me you are presenting me with a situation wherein it is unreasonable to assume I will survive on the basis of your decency.  In those circumstances I believe I have every right to respond with any force/lie/submission strategy I think will give me future opportunity to seek a future.  After that situation has passed, I think using force to get restitution is probably an initiation of force, as other, less permanent options are available to me.  I also think that lesser levels of force, a punch for example, merit a forceful response, as any physical violence can result in death, in spite of intent. 

My two cents, srqrebel.  Neil Smith's too, I think, though he is more eloquent about it.

[d_goddard]

After that situation has passed, I think using force to get restitution is probably an initiation of force

So, I should steal your stuff when you're not in your house.
Got it.