What is the difference between a voluntary community and a city-state?

[Giggan]

In this manner I do consider myself presently anarcho-capitalist more than anything.  I feel once a truly minarchist state is reached the next logical evolutionary step is anarcho-capitalist with a rapid transition to pure voluntaryism given proper conditions.

I feel similarly. Through a revolution, whether violent or non, with revolution being sudden, radical change, no voluntaryist/anarcho-capitalist system is going to arise. The change will be gradual whether we like it or not...but that doesn't mean the gradual change needs to be so slow. What needs to happen is we need a good number of people (whether or not its the majority doesn't matter) to believe in and work for voluntary society. A large number of people won't make this decision overnight, but as the change is happening, the size of govt will begin shrinking because it will lose its legitimacy in those people's eyes. Unless the govt responds with greater violence, and suddenly collapses, but I don't see it even being that powerful if enough people are down with peaceful interaction.

[John Edward Mercier]

Voluntarism means you can not initiate aggression, but it doesn't stop you from reacting to it.
Ostrascism is the only format considered acceptable for those things you do not feel morally acceptable in your presence, but do not aggress.

[DigitalWarrior]

I have a couple of questions for the anti-staters:

First: What is the right of redress?  If I sneak on to your property and pee on your rose garden then go to my home, are you going to form a posse to come get me?  What if I steal your TV?  Set your shed on fire?  Kill someone?  If the immediate threat is ended, wouldn't you be "initiating force" by retaliation?  If I am summoned to some "arbitration", I will chuckle and set the summons on fire and throw it into the street.

Second: What is the power of zoning ordinance?  If I buy a plot of land next to yours and then put in an iron smelting plant that belches poison fumes into your bedroom (directed there by a fan to blow it off my property), what do you do?  What if I test jet engines between the hours of 11pm and 7am?  What if I build a pig farm?  What if I put up a billboard with a highly offensive and graphic depiction of the marital art pointing at a school bus stop.  What if I leave a pile of garbage on my lawn where it rots?  What about a moldy couch?

Third: Are children property?  Can I sacrifice my firstborn male son to please the Phoenician God "Baa-al" as was the custom a few hundred years before Christ?  Can I lease them out as sex workers?  If not, then who safeguards them?

My own position is that I believe that government is like fire, necessary and beneficial, but is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master (credit to G. Washington).  I believe that the government have only powers expressly delegated to it, and the people must jealously guard their liberties.   

[John Edward Mercier]

I have a couple of questions for the anti-staters:

First: What is the right of redress?  If I sneak on to your property and pee on your rose garden then go to my home, are you going to form a posse to come get me?  What if I steal your TV?  Set your shed on fire?  Kill someone?  If the immediate threat is ended, wouldn't you be "initiating force" by retaliation?  If I am summoned to some "arbitration", I will chuckle and set the summons on fire and throw it into the street.
What do they do now? Even though the immediate threat has ended. A posse comes to your door, your summoned for abitration... and forced restitution occurs. But logically these (except maybe pissing on the roses) are all crimes with victims.

Second: What is the power of zoning ordinance?  If I buy a plot of land next to yours and then put in an iron smelting plant that belches poison fumes into your bedroom (directed there by a fan to blow it off my property), what do you do?  What if I test jet engines between the hours of 11pm and 7am?  What if I build a pig farm?  What if I put up a billboard with a highly offensive and graphic depiction of the marital art pointing at a school bus stop.  What if I leave a pile of garbage on my lawn where it rots?  What about a moldy couch?
The poison fumes would again make me a victim. As for the testing of the jet engines, couldn't legally be imposed in ordinance (even with the current system). The noise limit being set based not on decibel at the property borders, but on period of the day is a discrimination against those that sleep between the hours of 7am and 11pm. The fact that these rules exist and are not constitutionally challenged simply shows a society that is self-absorbed. All the other things would be deemed contractual between neighbors much as it is today in most of the State.

Third: Are children property?  Can I sacrifice my firstborn male son to please the Phoenician God "Baa-al" as was the custom a few hundred years before Christ?  Can I lease them out as sex workers?  If not, then who safeguards them?
Society is the State. In a voluntary society, you still could not aggress in this manner. You can not kill, nor lease a recognized person.

My own position is that I believe that government is like fire, necessary and beneficial, but is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master (credit to G. Washington).  I believe that the government have only powers expressly delegated to it, and the people must jealously guard their liberties.  

Voluntaryism is not anarchy... it a minarchy based on a non-aggression principle. This principle of governance holds that society is formed for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Not for the benefit of one person or one group and their moral discreation.
It was the original doctrine of both the US and NH Constitutions.

[DigitalWarrior]

It was the original doctrine of both the US and NH Constitutions.

3/5 of all other persons would strongly disagree with the principled defense of liberty.  The U.S. Constitution was a document of incredible compromise. 

[John Edward Mercier]

The US Constitution is a contractual agreement between the sovereign republics... not individuals.
The NH Constitution, though a quirk of wording and comprehension led to discontiniuty, has this...

[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.

June 2, 1784

Much of the modern ordinance is in violation there of. Other parts of the NH Constitution requires public (taxpayers) payment to property owners that have their property rights infringed. Zoning avoids this through something known as 'grandfather clauses' or ex post facto... but can come under duress should the present property owner through discovery prove property devaluation through such ordinance.

[DigitalWarrior]

I have a couple of questions for the anti-staters:

First: What is the right of redress?  If I sneak on to your property and pee on your rose garden then go to my home, are you going to form a posse to come get me?  What if I steal your TV?  Set your shed on fire?  Kill someone?  If the immediate threat is ended, wouldn't you be "initiating force" by retaliation?  If I am summoned to some "arbitration", I will chuckle and set the summons on fire and throw it into the street.
What do they do now? Even though the immediate threat has ended. A posse comes to your door, your summoned for abitration... and forced restitution occurs. But logically these (except maybe pissing on the roses) are all crimes with victims.
I think that the government we have now is pretty OK structurally.  The question is that if the posse visitation requires voluntary consent, what happens when a bad man builds a catapult to fling poo at his neighbor?  Does the offended neighbor have the right to declare a "war" between sovereigns?  There is no question that the bad man is doing wrong, but as he would say "Wachugonnadooboutit"  

Second: What is the power of zoning ordinance?  If I buy a plot of land next to yours and then put in an iron smelting plant that belches poison fumes into your bedroom (directed there by a fan to blow it off my property), what do you do?  What if I test jet engines between the hours of 11pm and 7am?  What if I build a pig farm?  What if I put up a billboard with a highly offensive and graphic depiction of the marital art pointing at a school bus stop.  What if I leave a pile of garbage on my lawn where it rots?  What about a moldy couch?
The poison fumes would again make me a victim. As for the testing of the jet engines, couldn't legally be imposed in ordinance (even with the current system). The noise limit being set based not on decibel at the property borders, but on period of the day is a discrimination against those that sleep between the hours of 7am and 11pm. The fact that these rules exist and are not constitutionally challenged simply shows a society that is self-absorbed. All the other things would be deemed contractual between neighbors much as it is today in most of the State.Who determines what kinds of pollution create harm?  Jet engines harm hearing.  Jet engine testing facilities lower the value of my property, is that harm (It picks my pocket)?  I propose we create a body for dealing with nuisance issues, we could call it a zoning board.

Third: Are children property?  Can I sacrifice my firstborn male son to please the Phoenician God "Baa-al" as was the custom a few hundred years before Christ?  Can I lease them out as sex workers?  If not, then who safeguards them?
Society is the State. In a voluntary society, you still could not aggress in this manner. You can not kill, nor lease a recognized person.I make some decisions for my children such as no TV after 4PM.  I decide whether they are vegetarians or meatenarians.  I can decide to prostitute myself.  I cannot decide to prostitute my child.  Someone has to make a decision about how bad I can harm my child and what I may order it to do.  I propose we create a body for dealing with these issues, we could call it a legislature.

My own position is that I believe that government is like fire, necessary and beneficial, but is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master (credit to G. Washington).  I believe that the government have only powers expressly delegated to it, and the people must jealously guard their liberties.  

Voluntaryism is not anarchy... it a minarchy based on a non-aggression principle. This principle of governance holds that society is formed for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Not for the benefit of one person or one group and their moral discreation.
It was the original doctrine of both the US and NH Constitutions.

A state in the political sense is often defined as a entity that reserves for itself the power of initiation of force.  I think the anti-federalists (who were right, but lost) would argue against the idea that The Constitution resembles minarchy.  

"And farther, full power and authority are hereby given and granted to the said general court, from time to time, to make, ordain, and establish, all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders, laws, statutes, ordinances, directions, and instructions, either with penalties, or without, so as the same be not repugnant or contrary to this constitution, as they may judge for the benefit and welfare of this state, and for the governing and ordering thereof, and of the subjects of the same, for the necessary support and defense of the government thereof..." - NH Constitution

[DigitalWarrior]

The US Constitution is a contractual agreement between the sovereign republics... not individuals.
The NH Constitution, though a quirk of wording and comprehension led to discontiniuty, has this...

[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.

June 2, 1784

Much of the modern ordinance is in violation there of. Other parts of the NH Constitution requires public (taxpayers) payment to property owners that have their property rights infringed. Zoning avoids this through something known as 'grandfather clauses' or ex post facto... but can come under duress should the present property owner through discovery prove property devaluation through such ordinance.

The thing you missed is later with "When men enter into a state of society, they surrender up some of their natural rights to that society, in order to ensure the protection of others; and, without such an equivalent, the surrender is void."   It says that while we can give up natural rights in order to secure others, we cannot give up our own volition.  So your natural right to build a big porn billboard is abridged so that you do not have to worry about pig farms next door devaluing your property.

[John Edward Mercier]

It has to be an 'equivalent'. This is why ex post facto can not be allowed, but future use restriction that does not devalue property may.
For example, you have a porn billboard and pig farm... an new ordinance does not affect your 'grandfathered' use.
I wish to build a porn billboard and pig farm after the ordinances are enacted. If I can prove through discovery that my neighbors properties would not devalue, and that the restriction devalues my property rights... then I have grounds for redress.

[John Edward Mercier]

I have a couple of questions for the anti-staters:

First: What is the right of redress?  If I sneak on to your property and pee on your rose garden then go to my home, are you going to form a posse to come get me?  What if I steal your TV?  Set your shed on fire?  Kill someone?  If the immediate threat is ended, wouldn't you be "initiating force" by retaliation?  If I am summoned to some "arbitration", I will chuckle and set the summons on fire and throw it into the street.
What do they do now? Even though the immediate threat has ended. A posse comes to your door, your summoned for abitration... and forced restitution occurs. But logically these (except maybe pissing on the roses) are all crimes with victims.
I think that the government we have now is pretty OK structurally.  The question is that if the posse visitation requires voluntary consent, what happens when a bad man builds a catapult to fling poo at his neighbor?  Does the offended neighbor have the right to declare a "war" between sovereigns?  There is no question that the bad man is doing wrong, but as he would say "Wachugonnadooboutit"  

Second: What is the power of zoning ordinance?  If I buy a plot of land next to yours and then put in an iron smelting plant that belches poison fumes into your bedroom (directed there by a fan to blow it off my property), what do you do?  What if I test jet engines between the hours of 11pm and 7am?  What if I build a pig farm?  What if I put up a billboard with a highly offensive and graphic depiction of the marital art pointing at a school bus stop.  What if I leave a pile of garbage on my lawn where it rots?  What about a moldy couch?
The poison fumes would again make me a victim. As for the testing of the jet engines, couldn't legally be imposed in ordinance (even with the current system). The noise limit being set based not on decibel at the property borders, but on period of the day is a discrimination against those that sleep between the hours of 7am and 11pm. The fact that these rules exist and are not constitutionally challenged simply shows a society that is self-absorbed. All the other things would be deemed contractual between neighbors much as it is today in most of the State.Who determines what kinds of pollution create harm?  Jet engines harm hearing.  Jet engine testing facilities lower the value of my property, is that harm (It picks my pocket)?  I propose we create a body for dealing with nuisance issues, we could call it a zoning board.

Third: Are children property?  Can I sacrifice my firstborn male son to please the Phoenician God "Baa-al" as was the custom a few hundred years before Christ?  Can I lease them out as sex workers?  If not, then who safeguards them?
Society is the State. In a voluntary society, you still could not aggress in this manner. You can not kill, nor lease a recognized person.I make some decisions for my children such as no TV after 4PM.  I decide whether they are vegetarians or meatenarians.  I can decide to prostitute myself.  I cannot decide to prostitute my child.  Someone has to make a decision about how bad I can harm my child and what I may order it to do.  I propose we create a body for dealing with these issues, we could call it a legislature.

My own position is that I believe that government is like fire, necessary and beneficial, but is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master (credit to G. Washington).  I believe that the government have only powers expressly delegated to it, and the people must jealously guard their liberties.  

Voluntaryism is not anarchy... it a minarchy based on a non-aggression principle. This principle of governance holds that society is formed for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Not for the benefit of one person or one group and their moral discreation.
It was the original doctrine of both the US and NH Constitutions.

A state in the political sense is often defined as a entity that reserves for itself the power of initiation of force.  I think the anti-federalists (who were right, but lost) would argue against the idea that The Constitution resembles minarchy.  

"And farther, full power and authority are hereby given and granted to the said general court, from time to time, to make, ordain, and establish, all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders, laws, statutes, ordinances, directions, and instructions, either with penalties, or without, so as the same be not repugnant or contrary to this constitution, as they may judge for the benefit and welfare of this state, and for the governing and ordering thereof, and of the subjects of the same, for the necessary support and defense of the government thereof..." - NH Constitution

Discontintuity.
[Art.] 12. [Protection and Taxation Reciprocal.] Every member of the community has a right to be protected by it, in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property; he is therefore bound to contribute his share in the expense of such protection, and to yield his personal service when necessary. But no part of a man's property shall be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people. Nor are the inhabitants of this state controllable by any other laws than those to which they, or their representative body, have given their consent.

June 2, 1784

Individual consent can not be equally attributed to custodial representation.

[DigitalWarrior]

I am still not clear, how do you hold me accountable for my hostile actions, if I do not consent to be held criminally liable for being hostile?

[John Edward Mercier]

Voluntarism only accounts for non-hostile acts.
It equates that for a crime to be committed their must be a victim, and does not allow for adults to be custodially represented except under extreme circumstance.

Once you consent to the hostile act, you consent to the consequences of such.
Imagine someone breaks into your home and you shoot them. They did not consent to be shot, but their hostile action implied to consent of the consequences.

[DigitalWarrior]

Once you consent to the hostile act, you consent to the consequences of such.

I am more interested in what happens after a bad neighbor burns down your shed then hides on his own property.  The immediate threat has passed, but it may return with terror and slaughter.  Shooting a man on your property would likely be more than OK.  I am curious about the pursuit of the enemy after the immediate threat is over.

Voluntarism only accounts for non-hostile acts

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHahahahahahhahaha
ahhahaha
ha
my turn my turn, "Communism is a great idea but people are too selfish"
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHahahahahahhahaha
ahhahaha
ha
oooh another one "From each according to his ability to..."
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHahahahahahhahaha
ahhahaha
ha

They did not consent to be shot, but their hostile action implied to consent of the consequences.

Couldn't it also be said that by moving to an area that is governed, their choice implies consent to the consequence of government?

[DigitalWarrior]

I hope that I am not being perceived as too snarky in that last one, I am genuinely curious about voluntaryists and anarchists.  I just prefer tomake sure we are talking about a society of men, rather than a society of angels.

[Giggan]

The Constitutions were based around the ideas of liberty but did not establish anything resmbling valuntaryism. NH's Constitution, specifically Part First, Article 3, says you have a right to receive the service of the state, to protect your rights, defend them when violated, and if you don't receive it, you don't have to pay, but the surrender of rights is initial. If the state is doing anything, they can claim they're doing their job, protecting rights. You then need to get enough people to agree to work within the system to get it running properly before you can stop paying your protection fees.

Part First, Art 11 says you cannot be prohibited from voting for not paying taxes, but the protection doesn't rightfully extend to save your house from seizure, etc for non payment. That's not voluntaryism.