PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 17 October at 15:17 - Around 76000 files indexed.
and Extortion Officer where I investigated allegations of extortion involving offenders.
..productive, fueled by the efforts of people to..improve their circumstances and those of others via voluntary interactions. To better understand what is meant by "equal" and "voluntary," consider this. When you and your neighbor reach an impasse, you may often "agree to disagree." If you have a disagreement with an official of the government, a more aggressive person - an enforcer - will take up the dispute; if you do not back down, you will be captured and kidnapped, or even killed. The mere act of resisting such kidnapping is itself deemed to be a crime, one which justifies - in the eyes of the government - your death. [This submission comes from Terry McIntyre] Equality and Isonomy, Sebastian Ortiz The idea of isonomy, or equality before the law, is based on prohibitions (do not steal, extort, attack, etc.) applying universally to all persons and institutions, and is contrary and incompatible with the socialist ideal of equality. Isonomy means that valid rules apply to all persons capable of intentional action. Equality, understood as a static and homogenous distribution of material goods among particular persons in the human population, is not only impossible, but undesirable for it goes against innovation, improvement, and the personal variations in obsessions, tastes, and preferences which bring about voluntary exchange; the very same exchanges intensify an unequal distribution of material goods among different persons based on what they like, at the cost of what they don't like, so that when those who prefer to spend may exchange with those who prefer to accumulate, they increase inequality by contributing to each other's goals on a peaceful, voluntary basis. To argue for equality as a desirable state of affairs is of the Devil, where by the devil we mean those falsehoods, intellectual errors, misunderstandings, impulses, behaviors and ignorance which if put into action result in crime. That is, the violent and forceful violation of someone's physical dominions (their body and their property) for the profit of others. To desire equality in the distribution of material goods is to desire an impossible state of affairs which goes against human preference, cooperation and choice; that is to say, equality in the material distribution of goods goes against human liberty. (Cont. pg. 4) 3 the Federal Reserve system, the lies to promote wars, the war profiteers to profit from them, the “Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, endless propaganda, the national police force. If you doubt that the FBI is at war with the we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; American people, visit Waco, Texas and see the we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have cenotaphs at Mt. Carmel. The path to victory involves the high ground. It prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have involves choosing the times and places of battle, implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical the rules of engagement, and having control of hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced our communications. If you value your freedom, additional violence and insult; our supplications have get in touch with me. Find me on Twitter.com/ planetaryjim; or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org and been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with let's get organized. contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace (Cont. Equality & Isonomy) and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for As an impossible goal, it serves only as an excuse hope. If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve to justify theft, extortion and other forms of inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have envy-based redistribution. This is the most been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to common, modern form of justification for state abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so theft and redistribution: that it is necessary to long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves promote equality. But in reality the fallacy of never to abandon until the glorious object of our equality is necessary to promote theft. contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, While the general man in the street may doubt or we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of have reservations about the market being able to Hosts is all that is left us!” ~ Patrick Henry, 23 March provide services of governance, that is, protection 1775 of life and property as well as judicial resolution It has been a long time coming, for many of us. I of disputes on an exclusively voluntary and was not born an abolitionist; I had the desire to contractual basis, the main justification given as abolish all forms of slavery beaten into me. excuse for the institution of the State, especially Repeatedly. I have eleven broken bones in my body under social-democracy, is to promote equality due to an exceptionally bloody and violent through extortion and redistribution. beating by the police in Houston in 2004 – the In this way the correct functions of governance, ticket they gave me said “Houston Super Bowl of security and resolution of conflicts is Dragnet.” I have been bloodied, but I am not substituted for the false presumption that an bowed. I will not bow down to these scum. entity of forceful redistribution is needed to You may say that we are weak, that we are not ensure greater equality. The evil reasoning then able to contend against so formidable an goes: theft is needed to promote an even adversary as the state. But when shall we ever be distribution of material goods. stronger? Next week? Next year? When more of From a judeo-christian standpoint: although the our brothers and sisters are out of work, are in government currently monopolizes the function prison, are deeper in debt? There are 71 million of protecting life, property and solving disputes, people in the United States with libertarian ideas one should remember that even if as a consumer and inclinations, who seek to be free, and would one has no option but State police and courts. The fight for their freedom, if only someone were to institution itself is illegitimate for it goes against show them a plan that made even a scintilla of the commandment thou shalt not steal. sense. The only possible legitimate "government" Sensible people may cry “peace, peace” but there would be police and courts paid for on a strictly is no peace. The government of the United States voluntary, contractual, individual basis. has been at war with the people of the United States since at least 1916. The Union League [Sebastian Ortiz studies law in Costa Rica] brownshirts, the Black Chamber spying on telegrams and phone calls, the enemy alien act, The Space Scouts, by Jim Davidson 4 “Sedition, Subversion, and Sabotage Field Manual No.
I only travelled two fare stages – Gwersyllt Wheatsheaf to Caergwrle Station – and yet the return fare cost a shocking £3.00, which for two four minute journeys is close to extortion – in fact, 5 times what it costs to do the same journey in a VW Polo (60p).
23-28) 1 Interview With Michael Huemer, by Non Facies Furtum Michael Huemer received his BA from UC Berkeley in 1992 and his PhD from Rutgers University in 1998. He is presently professor of philosophy at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He is the author of more than 60 academic articles in ethics, epistemology, political philosophy, and metaphysics, as well as four amazing books that you should definitely buy: Skepticism and the Veil of Perception (2001), Ethical Intuitionism (2005), The Problem of Political Authority (2013), and Approaching Infinity (2016). As he is a very influential libertarian philosopher active in the Front Range area, we contacted him for an interview and asked several questions related to the philosophy of liberty, and to his work. FRV: Can you outline your strongest argument for why the state lacks legitimate authority? MH: We don't need an argument that the state lacks authority. We would need an argument that the state has authority. If there's no reason why the state would be relevantly different from other agents, then we should assume the state is subject to the same moral principles as other agents. Now, there are several philosophical theories about why the state has authority. I discuss the most important ones at length in The Problem of Political Authority. But none of the theories is any good. All of them either (a) appeal to factually false claims, or (b) appeal to claims that, even if true, simply would not establish anyone's authority. An example of (a) is the claim everybody at some time agreed to establish a state (of course this never happened). An example of (b) would be the claim that a majority of people support the state (if a majority of people want something, that doesn't make that thing right). I can't fairly present all the theories of authority, nor the problems with them, here. I wrote a 350-page book to do that (among other things), and all of it needs to be read to understand the complete argument. But the basic reason I don't believe in authority is simply that no one has given any good reason why the state would have authority. In brief, no one has told me why 535 people in Washington have the right to tell everyone else what to do. If there was a good answer to that, someone would probably have thought of it by now. FRV: What do you think is the most practical path to achieving a stateless society? MH: I don't know. What I am doing is trying to get more people to understand anarcho-capitalism, in the hope that if enough people understand the theory and why it's a good idea, it will eventually come about. We could move toward anarchy gradually. For example, we could start with local governments outsourcing policing duties to private security guard companies. (Of course, there would need to be a number of competing security companies, and an easy mechanism for citizens to change companies.) Similarly, courts could start referring more cases to private arbitrators. If these experiments went well, they could be expanded, and the government shrunk at the same time. Of course, this probably would not happen until there was much greater understanding of and support for free markets. I don't know whether this is the best path. But it's one possible path that seems to me worth considering. FRV: You have written much on the subject of ethical intuitionism; can you explain this idea, and provide some examples of how applying it to moral situations leads to the conclusion that the state is an immoral institution? 2 MH: The theory holds that we have intuitive awareness of some objective ethical truths, and this is the basis for the rest of our knowledge of ethics. I've written a book on the subject (Ethical Intuitionism), as well as a number of academic articles. You're basically asking me, "Hey, could you summarize your 300-page book in a couple of minutes?" To which the most accurate answer would be, "No, I can't." There's nothing I could say in a brief space that wouldn't be misleading. (The book is 300 pages because there is a complex set of ideas and arguments that require that amount of space to fairly present.) But I can give you some examples of the moral problems with the state. One example is about taxation. Suppose that I personally decided to start "taxing" people. I go around to people's houses demanding a cut of their total income, which I plan to use for a charity that I run to help the poor. I threaten to kidnap and imprison my neighbors if they don't give me the money. This would be regarded as clearly wrong, and no one would think they owed me the money. I would be called a thief and an extortionist. But that is like the government's behavior when it collects taxes. The difference between "extortion" and "taxation" is just that one is done by a private agent, and the other is done by the government. A second example concerns military intervention. What if I announced, one day, that a certain foreign country might be building weapons of mass destruction, and that they had to be stopped? What if I got a group of friends together, flew to that country, and started shooting people and blowing up buildings, in an effort to change that country's government? Most would consider my behavior wrong even if the foreign government was really bad. I would be labelled a terrorist and a mass murderer. But this is like the government's behavior when it goes to war. The chief difference between "terrorism"
"...it is not unusual for the police to carry their regulation .303 rifles during the day and a Kalashnikov [the favoured weapon of the armed Sikh separatists] at night, as they too take to extortion.
that control vast areas and illegal activities ranging from extortion to murder to unlicensed public transport;
does not stop the prosperity of a lawful business, but merely eliminates extortion and brings about a just re .
1 COMPLAINT Case 2:15-cv-01768-DJH Document 1 Filed 09/03/15 Page 3 of 19 1 subject to threats and extortion.
High Court of NGA Register · 22 pages High Court of NGA — Leave Division Klassen CJ 8 December 2017 — Brisbane Headnotes Executive Punishment — False Accusations — Offence against human dignity —Prejudicial Administration — Likelihood to Succeed — Litigious Extortion — Executive Sovereignty — Injunction — NGA Rules Act.
In February 2015, a class action complaint was filed against the City of Ferguson asserting that the city’s jails had become a “modern debtors’ prison scheme” that had “devastated the City’s poor, trapping them for years in a cycle of increased fees, debts, extortion, and cruel jailings.”1 Moreover, the Department of Justice’s report on the Ferguson Police Department presents a scathing indictment of a system apparently more concerned with revenue collection than justice.
or “(ii) is burglary, arson, or extortion, involves use of explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” §924(e)(2)(B).
When the DOJ memo came to light, Burmeister said her remarks sounded “pretty harsh.” But she stood by her allegations, which were anecdotal and based on an interaction she said she had with a former Augusta mayor who had died the previous year and had been convicted of extortion in 1984.