Voluntaryism is Morally, Economically, and Socially Better for Society than Statism

The Debate will follow a few simple guidelines. When stating a fact or statistic, sources must be posted. If one side resorts to personal attacks (Ad hominem,) they forfeit the debate. One's "view" or "opinion" can be "irrational, stupid, or retarded," but the person them self is not. (I don't think we will have a problem with this.) I will post my opening statement to address my opinion on the topic, and I will expect the opposition to post their opinion in the same manner. I will follow with my criticism, and questions. The next post by the opposition will answer the questions, criticize my opening statement, and ask me questions. This will be considered a round. On the final opportunity for either of us to post, we will wrap up our thought with a conclusion. Let us begin: I like to start a discussion off with definitions to avoid unnecessary conflict: Voluntaryism: The belief that every interaction between two parties should be voluntary, and the the initiation of force to coerce someone into a contract is immoral and unjust. The belief that any aggression against another human being, who has not initiated the aggression, is immoral, and intolerable. This can also be defined as: Anarco-Capitalism: Unfettered capitalism, not to be confused with modern corporatism. AnCap is regulated by the market itself, rather than by a centralized power. Non-Aggression Principle: Anybody has the moral right to do anything they wish to do, so long as it does not affect the safety or liberty of another person or their property. Any initiation of force/aggression (not in defense of one"s self or another person) is considered immoral and intolerable. It is the belief that violence should never be used to manipulate non-violent behaviors. The use of force is determined by the situation it is used in, not by who is using it. Statism: The religious belief that society cannot organize in a "civil" manner without a centralized monopoly of force to initiate violence, extort all parties, and coerce the minority into whatever the majority, or the person in power, wishes to impose on them. In truth, the belief in government is a terrifying religion, made up of a set of dogmatic teachings, irrational doctrines which fly in the face of both evidence and logic, which are methodically memorized by the faithful. Men, often the most corrupt, are "chosen" and through ceremonial rite, are given the "right" to declare what is morally acceptable, and what is not. Might becomes right, and legality triumphs over morality. The worshipers of the state are most dangerous, for history has shown Democide to have killed 360,000,000 people in the last 100 years*. Statists are known to abandon all personal morality for the morality of the state, even at the cost of their own life when necessary. Morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Voluntaryism is morally better for society on the simple fact that anarchists do not know what is best for everyone. It is the simple recognition that no man, woman, or group thereof is ever wise enough to come up with the best possible way to run other people"s lives. Just as no one else should be able to enforce on you his choice of marriage partner, or compel you to follow a career of his choosing, no one else should be able to enforce his preferences for social organization on you. As long as what a person is doing does not violate the NAP, no other person has the moral right to govern that individual. Statism is immoral, and fails to stand in the face of simple logic. I have no right to kick in your door, drag you away from your family, throw you in a rape cage, and kill you if you resist if I don't like what you do. I do not have the right to send men with guns into your home to for not donating money to my cause. If myself and my co worker vote 2 to 1 that you owe us money, I have no moral right to collect. We also cannot bestow the right to rob you onto another person or group, simply because we do not have that right to begin with. The only thing the state and government are needed for is to attempt to legitimize immoral force. No matter how peaceful, humanitarian and tolerant you are, no matter how well meaning and honorable your goals " if you ask for a government law, program, or plan, ultimately that program will be paid for with the property taken by force from others and the law will be enforced at the point of a gun. Voluntaryism is Economically better for society in that businesses will not be burdened with centralized regulation, therefore becoming more productive and able to generate high paying jobs. Health, Fairness, Safety, and corruption will be regulated by the consumers and by crediting services that companies voluntarily associate with in order to please consumers. Companies currently being taxed enough to support the entire military industrial complex** will be able to reinvest their money into the economy, and into services that directly affect them like the maintenance of roads. When companies conspire to raise a price or become corrupt, instead of enlisting government to mandate liability away from themselves, they will be subdued by the competition of the free market. "Most people believe that once one conceded the importance, or even vital necessity, of some particular activity of the state " such as the provision of a legal code " that one has ipso facto conceded the necessity of the state itself. The state indeed performs many important and necessary functions: from provision of law to the supply of police and fire fighters, to building and maintaining the streets, to the delivery of mail. But this in no way demonstrates that ONLY the state can perform such functions or, indeed, that it performs them even passably well." - Murray Rothbard Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. The reason why Voluntaryism is Socially better for Society ties in with Morality. People ultimately own themselves, and have no right to tell others how they should live their lives, so long as what they do does not infringe on the NAP. People will be able to live their lives without a centralized monopoly of force coercing them into any social reform. Terms such as morality and crime, law and legislation, leaders and citizens, are often used by people who have never rationally examined such concepts. Anarchists believe we have no right to rule you, and there should be no centralized coercive monopoly of violence to force you into a way of life. Voluntaryism is no guarantee that some people won"t kill, injure, kidnap, defraud or steal from others. Government, however, is a guarantee that some will. I will end my rant with a quote by Robert Higgs, "Anarchists did not try to carry out genocide against the Armenians in Turkey; they did not deliberately starve millions of Ukrainians; they did not create a system of death camps to kill Jews, gypsies, and Slavs in Europe; they did not fire-bomb scores of large German and Japanese cities and drop nuclear bombs on two of them; they did not carry out a "Great Leap Forward" that killed scores of millions of Chinese; they did not attempt to kill everybody with any appreciable education in Cambodia; they did not launch one aggressive war after another; they did not implement trade sanctions that killed perhaps 500,000 Iraqi children. In debates between anarchists and statists, the burden of proof clearly should rest on those who place their trust in the state. Anarchy"s mayhem is wholly conjectural; the state"s mayhem is undeniably, factually horrendous." *http://www.hawaii.edu... **http://www.washingtonpost.com...