Zack Bass wrote: > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> If no one else has said it, let me be the first: >> coercion begins where consent ends. >> >> > > Bullshit. If I join a HomeOwners Association, and after a decade or > so I don't feel like putting up with their crap anymore, may I > withdraw my Consent and cry "Coercion"? > Here's how you do it: you post your house 'for sale', pack up your goods (and bads), and walk away. Depending upon your contract, you may owe damages. NO ONE will force you to continue living there and specifically perform your contract. You can "walk away". Or hell, drive if you must.
If, on the other hand, you insist on staying put _and_ on abrogating the terms of your contract, you may indeed cry, "coercion" but it is you doing the coercing. > Another thing: There is nothing unlibertarian about Coercion (read > the definition), unless it involves Initiation Of Force. If I > threaten to do that which would not be Initiation Of Force if I did > not make it a threat, then it is not Initiation Of Force. > > Example of Coercion that is not Initiation Of Force: > "Get off my lawn or I will shoot you." > > A Pop-Culture example, this one being Libertarian Blackmail: > Hank Hill had proof that a guy he didn't like had committed Initiation > Of Force against him. He threatened to tell the cops if the guy > didn't move out of the neighborhood. > > See? Perfectly acceptable Coercion. > Oh agreed, of course. But you clearly don't appreciate my artistry. "The initiation of force begins where consent ends" just doesn't -- have the same punch you see. Not alliterative; doesn't sing. G.
