Long after I became a fan of his movies, I learned to my great delight
that, in real life, he's considers himself a libertarian.
G.
Curt Howland wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
>
>> Why the hell do you t
Curt,
Curt Howland wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
>
>> Dennis,
>>
>> Thanks for the links and the pointer to Rodrick's talk. Very
>> enjoyable. If I recall correctly, he's done a great deal of
>> workin
Zack Bass wrote:
> http://blog.mises.org/archives/007967.asp
> "If someone attacks another, that act carries with it, as a matter of
> the logic of aggression, the implication that from a rational moral
> standpoint the victim may, and often should, retaliate."
> --Tibor R. Machan, Individuals an
Same article; same reply.
G.
Zack Bass wrote:
> http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_4.pdf
> "punishment is not initiatory force; it is force in response to
> initiated force."
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> --- In Libertarian
Nice find. Kinsella does a decent job of using reductio ad absurdum to
demolish Smith's argument against punishment. (Do note that Smith's is
not the _only_ argument against punishment.)
Note also, in the part you quoted and in the rest of his article,
Kinsella's emphasis or proportionality.
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
>>> the literature which upholds NAP where for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
> Why the hell do you think Clint Eastwood said, "Go ahead; make my
> day?"
And everyone who saw it knew exactly what he meant.
He would not kill except in defense of innocents. So long as
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> both your scenarios are an initiation of force. The
>> first is obvious; the second by invalid contract.
>>
>>
>
> Any Contract that is Freely entered into is Valid.
A con
Why the hell do you think Clint Eastwood said, "Go ahead; make my day?"
G.
Zack Bass wrote:
> Please note that if someone bludgeons a man in the back of the head
> and drops the bat, a "Self-Defense Only" libertarian would perforce be
> reduced to standing there bleeding. If the first guy used a
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
>> the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever justified by
>> anything save defense. But perhaps my memory fails wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
> Dennis,
>
> Thanks for the links and the pointer to Rodrick's talk. Very
> enjoyable. If I recall correctly, he's done a great deal of
> working out how to implement a libertarian legal s
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
>> the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever
>> justified by anything save defense.
>> But perhaps my memory fails w
Dennis,
Thanks for the links and the pointer to Rodrick's talk. Very
enjoyable. If I recall correctly, he's done a great deal of working out
how to implement a libertarian legal system.
I'll try to avoid walking over covered ground with Zack.
G.
Dennis Lee Wilson wrote:
> Gary,
>
> I had an
Uh, that is a NEGATIVE opinion of the Justice System, is it not?
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Lee Wilson"
> wrote:
> >
> > retained the King's Retribution legal system, which
> >
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Lee Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I never describe my views in negative terms such
> as "anti-Retribution".
> Anyone who uses negative terminology to describes
> my views is trying to distort my views.
>
Oh, like the PRO-Life and PRO-
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Lee Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> retained the King's Retribution legal system, which
> rewards the State, but leaves the victim with nothing
> but higher taxes to support the prisons and the court
> system, a feeling of loss (which is
Gary,
I had an extended "discussion" with Zack in July of this year about
Retribution vs Restitution. Here are a couple of starter links if you
care to review the postings: (These are my postings. There are other
links contained within and after the postings.)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libert
From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Dang, Ward; ever consider New Hampshire?
>
> (I haven't followed the Free State thing at all closely. Considered it
> a good idea, wished I was free to pick up and move. Hoped it would work
> out and be available as an option later in life.)
I've at
http://freecapitalist.com/2008/05/23/freecapitalist-pledge%E2%84%A2/
"No such society, attributing moral authority to tyranny, can long
survive while counting that which is evil and wrong for one man to do
to another, to be good and right when a group of men conspire to
accomplish the same act."
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/articles/webelieve.html
"If it is wrong for one man to take your money, how can it be right
for a group of men?"
-- Wendy McElroy
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.co
http://blog.mises.org/archives/007967.asp
"If someone attacks another, that act carries with it, as a matter of
the logic of aggression, the implication that from a rational moral
standpoint the victim may, and often should, retaliate."
--Tibor R. Machan, Individuals and Their Rights (1989): 176
http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_4.pdf
"punishment is not initiatory force; it is force in response to
initiated force."
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> wrote:
> >
> > I
The Initiator Of Force forfeits any "Right" not to have Force used
against him. By the standard HE HIMSELF has followed, what you do to
him is at least as justified as his Aggression toward you.
http://mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_4.pdf
There are further errors in Smith's article. Consider,
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> wrote:
> >
> > I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
> > the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever
> > justified by
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> both your scenarios are an initiation of force. The
> first is obvious; the second by invalid contract.
>
Any Contract that is Freely entered into is Valid. Libertarian
Principles uphold this; Progress
We're getting a strange crop of Anarchists and Individualists this year.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> wrote:
> >
> > You don't get to be judge in your own case
> >
>
>
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Curt Howland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Once the coercion is stopped, it is time to sue.
>
You mean like in a COURT? You mean I can't just hire a Protection
Agency to go get my Restitution for me? Using Force in the (likely)
event that the Perp
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You don't get to be judge in your own case
>
Do I get to take The Law into my own hands?
(S.I.T.S.B.S.I.B.I.)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > I never do that.
You do it constantly.
> > "DEFENSE" is not the only thing that NAP allows! Duh. If one
> > guy INITIATES Force and then stops,...
Then that's it. "Shooting someone in the back" is not justified.
Once the co
Please note that if someone bludgeons a man in the back of the head
and drops the bat, a "Self-Defense Only" libertarian would perforce be
reduced to standing there bleeding. If the first guy used a .45
instead of a bat, there would not even be a Lawsuit, since no one
lived to sue him.
--- In L
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
> the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever justified by
> anything save defense. But perhaps my memory fails with age. Pointer?
>
This do
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I do not recall anywhere in my extensive reading of
> the literature which upholds NAP where force is ever
> justified by anything save defense.
> But perhaps my memory fails with age. Pointer?
>
Beats m
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> What part of "INITIATION" seems to be giving you the most trouble?
>>>
>>>
>> The part where you begin to initiate force
>> rather than defend yourself against it.
>>
>>
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If, for instance, you use your finger to poke me
> in the chest to make a point, I don't get to draw
> my 45 and poke you in the chest with a bullet.
> It would doubtless make my point well enough
> but i
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > So now you are saying that a Contract to sell one's organs to the
> > Organ Banks is "Invalid"? That if A agrees to give B a million
> > dollars for his organs so that his kids can get
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > You are confusing NAP with Niceness. It has led to your condonation
> > of Forced Compassion.
> >
> >
> Your definitions continue to lead you down a dark, very dark alley.
>
I defi
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What part of "INITIATION" seems to be giving you the most trouble?
> >
> The part where you begin to initiate force
> rather than defend yourself against it.
>
I never do that.
"DEFENSE" is not the on
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> NAP is not a suit of armor nor a Holy incantation
> that you may chant at your neighbors as they
> come to restrain you.
>
We agreed on that a long time ago. OF COURSE your shithead neighbors
DO IN FACT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>> As is usual in these discussion groups, the first one to wield the
>>> word "semantic" wins. Nyah nyah nyah.
>>>
>>>
>> Cute. Are those the kind of battles you usually elect to wage
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> My conception of NAP, ZAP, or non-initiation of force,
>> holds no room at all for justifying the barbaric
>> customs of "punishment" or "retribution."
>>
>>
>
> What part of
Zack Bass wrote:
> So now you are saying that a Contract to sell one's organs to the
> Organ Banks is "Invalid"? That if A agrees to give B a million
> dollars for his organs so that his kids can get their operations, and
> B takes the money and spends it and says "SUE ME!", then A would be
> In
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ... to ensure that the force was used... proportionately
>>
>>
>
> I think you mean some other, Nicer concept such as Commensurately.
> "An eye for each fingernail" is Propor
Zack Bass wrote:
> You are confusing NAP with Niceness. It has led to your condonation
> of Forced Compassion.
>
>
Your definitions continue to lead you down a dark, very dark alley.
G.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 07 October 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
> From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > You seem to presume that 'unilateral cancellation of contract'
> > can be done with impunity. Don't believe I ever suggested that.
>
> Esp
CRIME PAYS without Punitive Damages. Say Perfidio The Fisher gets
caught 99% of the time. Costs him nothing, he gives the jewels back.
But 1% of the time he gets to keep the loot.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> RISK-FREE THIEVERY!
>
RISK-FREE THIEVERY!
The Shoplifters and Gypsies and Travelers and Embezzlers will eat you
alive!
All stores will be full of Shoplifters. Sometimes they get away with
it. If caught, though, they simply empty the huge pockets in their
jackets and walk away and try again in an hour.
Embezzlers wil
From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > As is usual in these discussion groups, the first one to wield the
> > word "semantic" wins. Nyah nyah nyah.
> >
> Cute. Are those the kind of battles you usually elect to wage? :)
>
> (Actually, wrangling over semantics can b
47 matches
Mail list logo
