floater

Rothbardian Anarcho Capitalist | Objectivist | English isn't my first language (I mix up words and punctuation a lot. Corrections are appreciated)

[biglou @justlooking120]

@whoupfloating @AgoristN How about No. How about you go flush the toilet on your head

[floater @whoupfloating]

@AlisDekay Mentis is a little culture warrior

[floater @whoupfloating]

What does democracy provide for society again

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @aeskiusalpinius @Ace_Archist Conquered? So mere possession is what constitutes ownership?

Developed it using what money?

Defending it using what money?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist It's like you're being disingenuous deliberately

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 ...which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law.

This is circular logic

[floater @whoupfloating]

Legal positivist constantly begs the question and presupposes that he is right. Not even Hart or whatever his name was was this retarded

[liliceberg @liliceberg1of1]

@whoupfloating @Ace_Archist And by what ethical standard do you excuse the action of accelerating your car while detained with an LEO in your path?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist and this frame just topples this narrative dude

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Until after the car began moving. You know what I meant, you're just being disingenuous.

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 The detention was justified because it's the law, and the law is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law, which is justified because it's the law...

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Except he wasn't infront until after

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Why do you insist on avoiding my questions?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist https://t.co/Yd8P6wVNZL

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Law must answer to an external standard, then. Ethics being debated on is irrelevant because that has no bearing on whether it is real or binding. People disagree about science and logic, does that make those domains subjective?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist While you're at it, can you tell me where the vehicle is sterring?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Ethics are not subjective. Read the book

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Can you tell me what position he is in in this frame?

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Why is the ethics framework I provided not the same type as yours? It appeals to a generalizable, action guiding principle. Yours on the other hand only appeals to institutional authority.

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist And I compared it to slavery and the holocaust because your justification for the state's law is enforceability, which is literally just power. This in principle justifies those things.

[floater @whoupfloating]

@liliceberg1of1 @Ace_Archist Slavery was enforceable, does that make it justified?
The holocaust was enforceable, does that make it justified?

The law is right because it's law, it matters because it's enforced, and enforcement is right because it's the law? Is this seriously the hill you want to die on?