| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/klassen/klassen96.htmlWho will sell me coercion insurance? I must admit that the above quote strikes in me a bit of envy. I thought I coined a good phrase awhile ago, thinking myself to be creative, revolutionary, inventive, etc. My version of coercion insurance was 'despotism insurance'. If one is to apply the concept of government to anarchism, then, one is inevitably going to arrive at coercion insurance and market anarchism. It is the natural progression of logic. At least now you don't have to take my word on it. While I am at it, and for your consideration, it may be a good time to re-introduce a concept known as THE STATE and to say, unequivocally, that THE STATE is not the same thing as government. One dictates and the other governs. I am going to link an example of a STATE that could exist without having any need for elected Dictators. The people would vote on who receives the dictate and the actual dictators would simply work for pay; a prize fighter, mercenary, bounty hunter type of scenario. The voters would be anonymous. The dictates would be published automatically. And the whole affair would work autonomously. In other words the players in the game would be masked; kind of like super heroes and super villains. Only the subjects of the dictates would be known by their real names. The dictates would identify the real names of the intended subjects of each specific dictate. Before I link the example of the State, that could be, I’m impressed with the need to warn the reader that this genie should never be let out of the bottle. Fear not since that magic lamp is buried deep in the sands of time never to be opened again by any power seeking more power. The most powerful genie doesn’t like competition. Along with the warning concerning the next link I’m also inclined to redirect attention back to the concept of ‘coercion insurance’. I’ll keep my definition in mind instead: “Despotism Insurance”. Read the link and then compare the link to a product offered by someone somewhere and that product is a small fee, an insurance premium, a small payment of wealth, a little bit of the current currency, and that product promises to bring the weight of an immense collection of power upon any force that happens to injure you, the holder of the product, the holder of the insurance policy, against the despot who INTENDS to injure you. Here is the link: http://jya.com/ap.htm And here is a some background on the author of Assassination Politics. http://jya.com/jdbfiles.htm Suppose that the reader has read the articles above and my commentary and suppose the reader is still somewhat stuck in the old way of thinking about government and The State but now, suppose, that the reader has just enough curiosity to begin looking into the proverbial looking glass. What do you see? On the one hand is The State. That can be a future whereby people vote and the ‘winner’ is snuffed out. A payment is made to the one who killed the winner and everything is done ‘under the table’. If the reader is even slightly skeptical concerning this type of arrangement then please consider reading Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner where the practice of putting a bounty on the Kings head in England was, in fact, a common law practice and the King’s killer merely had to pay a fine. The money used to pay the fine could, conceivably be pre-arranged in any manner whereby people ‘pass the hat’ and gather up money. Any means to the end will do when people decide to get something done. That should be a no-brainer. I’ll link to Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner now: http://www.lysanderspooner.org/bib_new.htm On the one hand is The STATE. The business of the state is to harm, injure, punish, torture, kill, terrorize, and otherwise do things against the will of the subject being worked on by The State. No one really wants to be a criminal. The state makes criminals and the state executes the laws that prescribe what is to be done with criminals. On the other hand is Government. When the reader is thoroughly enamored with The State it may come as a pleasant surprise to discover simple Government to be as simple as an insurance policy against The State. Put the two together. Imagine being a published enemy of the state and at the same time holding an insurance policy against loss by the state. Do you think that you can afford the insurance premium? Do you know how insurance works? It is really, really, simple. Suppose you, yourself, wanted to insure the whole population against total destruction from a meteor. You ask the whole population to take out a policy and you will provide, with the money received from all the insurance policy ‘buyers’, you provide anti-meteor insurance. If no one takes out a policy today, then, no money is available to insure against loss from meteor attack. Now suppose that some astronomer reports a finding in outer space that predicts with almost certainty a collision between earth and a meteor in 10 years time from today. What is not known, however, is which side of the planet the meteor will strike – exactly. Scientists around the world get together and figure out that the size and speed of the meteor will wipe out either the east coast of the U.S. or the west coast of Africa. Suppose now that Bill Gates and Donald Trump get together and offer half the money to build an anti-meteor system. Bill and Don also offer insurance against loss due to meteor. A holder of the policy will only receive money back if the meteor hits their property. If the meteor does not hit their property, then, the insurance policy expires on the day after the known meteor is known to contact the earth. Who buys shark bite insurance? What is the premium, or cost, of shark bite insurance for someone living in Kansas? What is the premium, or cost, of shark bite insurance for a surfer dude? What are the odds that you or anyone will be a victim of ‘terrorist attack’? What if you lived in Iraq? What is your despotism insurance premium for you if you live in Iraq? Would you have purchased a ticket to guess the date that Hitler dies if you were a Jew living in Germany in 1939 if you knew that your ‘vote’ would add to the money given anonymously to the person who correctly guessed the day that Hitler dies? If you were living in Feudal England and the King raised taxed too high, then, would you pass the hat to pay the fine for having the King Killed? Which is better: The State punishment racket or voluntary government? Which is better: Assassination Politics or Despotism Insurance? Ducking the question does leave the answers up to your fellow citizens on this planet. How much do you trust your fellow friends of liberty? |
|||||||||||
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Will you invest in punishing anyone that your representative deems to be worthy of punishment? Like this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts182.html
Will you invest in an insurance policy that protects a person from isolated confinement, torture, and the denial of legal representation? Investing in The State is just as much of a gamble as investing in an insurance policy. The State will probably not single you out. The insurance policy only singles out those who qualify or earn the credit they deserve. The State intends to punish. The insurance policy intends to protect. The State gains power through coercion, fear, threats of violence, and inevitable violence. The insurance policy gains power through voluntary investments against coercion. Run the numbers. Suppose the States and the insurance providers all compete against each other in any example imaginable: shark bite, simple robbery, fraud, meteor attack, terrorist attack, and torture by the president, whatever. Insurance provider A (this can be one person providing the policy via a web page or a number of people working together to provide the policy in any way possible), insurance provider A offers legal representation up to and including 1 million dollars for anyone accused of ‘terrorism’, arrested, tortured, and held without legal representation. Insurance provider B (a foreign company perhaps) offers another policy that includes a ‘break out’ clause that sends ninja troops to rescue the policy holder that is arrested, tortured, etc. Provider A offers the policy at 10 dollars monthly or 100 dollars yearly with a 10 year discount of 900 dollars. Provider B offers the policy at 1000 dollars monthly. Would you buy any despotism insurance? Would you buy any despotism insurance if you were an Iraqi living in the U.S.? How much do you pay in taxes? How much did Jose Padilla pay in taxes? Did Jose Padilla pay too much in taxes or not enough in taxes? Do the ‘troops’ pay enough? Last edited on Mon Nov 13th, 2006 07:36 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||
