[Question asked is "Can I own slaves in Anarcho-Capitalism?"]
"If the "slave" decides to walk away, you think you have a "right" to use force to keep him?"
They sold away their right (In the legal sense of the term) to exit, thus giving the owner cause for damages if they violate that agreement.
"you think you have a "right" to use force to keep him?"
The whole point of private property is that you can use force to defend your ownership of it
31 comments
"They sold away their right (In the legal sense of the term) to exit, thus giving the owner cause for damages if they violate that agreement. "
But if the capitalism is anarcho, where is the rule of law that can be enforced? If one person has no right to freedom, how does another have a right to property? Or for that matter, right to life?
@Doubting Thomas: That's pretty easy; you just need to make sure that they don't have a choice in the matter. When the underclass is starving because they can't afford food, you'll find quite a few people willing to sell off family members or themselves in exchange for the promise of food and warmth.
Get that French maid's outfit on, my girlfriend demands that you do!
She has a right to keep you, therefore get to work, chop-chop!
Your 'Opinion' means you have sold your right to not be a slave. Especially when there are men built like brick shithouses who pay good money to Dominatrixes: voluntarily, and of their own free will.
How Anarcho-Capitalistic can you get...?!
"That's libertarians for you anarchists who want police protection from their slaves."Green Mars
At least this one is honest.
Yet another exemple for demonstrating Anarcho-Capitalism is, pushed to the extreme, morally bankrupt.
@Nemo
Even slaveowners were happy with a strong federal government so as to catch theyr runaway slaves, along with a strong security apparitus to prevent revolts (one of the arguments used in France and Britain to abolish slavery in their colonies was to reduce the huge costs created by the military garnisons needed so as to prevent Haiti Mk. 2).
They sold away their right
It's always "they". Why do these people always assume they will be on the winning side of things like this, i.e. the owner and not the owned?
I wonder if Dr_ Jawa would agree with "I sold away my right to exit, thus giving my owner cause for damages if I violate that agreement"?
I doubt it.
> That interpretation is at odds with most anarchist
Most actual anarchists do not consider so-called "anarcho-capitalism" to be anarchism at all...
@Nemo
Small government doesn't mean tolerance of kidnappers.
Anyway most forms of libertarian thought do not allow for one to actually sell his fundamental rights either. So for example, you can't consent to being killed and eaten by a cannibal.
I will admit that unlike some theories of anarchy, this is at least internally consistent. Brutal and unpleasant to live under, not to mention likely inherently unstable, but honest.
@ Mister Spak:
@ Pharaoh Bastethotep:
1) You're talking about owning another human being as property, like it's a legal contract. Fuck you.
2) Slaves haven't "sold away" any of their rights, and even if they did, it's illegal (not to mention immoral) to accept them. They're SLAVES, not business partners. Fuck you.
3) I'm no lawyer or criminal justice expert, but I'm pretty sure that use of force isn't legally justified for property crimes, unless there's an imminent threat of harm. Using force to keep somebody from going on their way is called KIDNAPPING, and it's punishable by prison. Fuck you.
4) If one of your "slaves" were to walk away, they have the right to do so. The Bill of Rights supersedes any real or perceived business relationship between a slave and his or her master.
This is case in point why if everyone is to have freedom (which is a great idea and presumably what these libertarians/"anarcho"-capitalists want), you need something to enforce the freedom, because otherwise, you would get this. Or McDonalds death squads (you thought the MAGA ones were bad, lol, the ancaps laugh at you!) as the linked image points out.
Well, the US still has legal slavery in 2016!
See Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution :Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted , shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
All you have to do in order to have slaves in the US, is to open your own private prison and you have all the slave labor you need and you can set them to make you money doing slavelabor.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
