From: Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> On 10/31/2015 05:44 PM, coderman wrote:
On 10/31/15, jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
... I also solved David Friedman's "Hard problem", see his book, "The Machinery of Freedom", the previously-assumed difficulty or impossibility of providing for the defense of a fully libertarian or anarchistic society.
i'd support AP with a basic income in place. otherwise, the few outliers could out leverage even the most widely prevalent crowd dispositions...
basic income + assassination politics == awesome future!**
[ **this conjecture remains to be proven... ]
Well, back in the day, I thought AP way cool. But some years later, more conscious of increasing concentration of wealth, I doubt that it would>improve on status quo. Are you assuming that "concentration of wealth" ISN'T a PRODUCT of government? I believe AP will shrink or most likely eliminate government, certainly as we know it. Do you know this wouldn't fix the "concentration of wealth" problem? And what's wrong with "concentration of wealth" if it occurs as a product only of non-aggression? (Like some capitalist offering a better product, for a lower price.) . Sure, maybe crowd-funding would take down some assholes. But serious assholes are seriously hard to kill. If they are truly "serious assholes" then they will piss off large numbers of people. That means many people will be donating to see them stop it. More people donating means a smaller donation per person will be sufficient.
Also, itwould provide another mechanism for governments to covertly kill their>enemies. In order for governments to kill their enemies, they first must know who their enemies are. Merely by remaining silent, for awhile, a person can conceal himself as an "enemy" of governments. They can use AP to get rid of those governments, silently.
I'm reminded of Kim's Shit Slaughter Squad in Burroughs' _Place of Dead>Roads_ about killing the assholes. Never heard of it. Jim Bell