Subject:
|
Re: We'll take in your poor, your homeless, your oppressed...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:31:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1280 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz wrote:
>
> "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@ascentialsoftwareDOTcom> wrote in
> message news:I0Ju05.zt6@lugnet.com...
> > These are LMF answers, not my own, which are rather muddier.
> >
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm, how do you define sovereignty? Does it require consent of the people
> > > and property owners covered by the claim of sovereignty?
> >
> > Yes, each and every one...
>
> Ok, so an improperly formed sovereignty doesn't have any validity...
Dejure. "consent of the governed" and all that... It may defacto have a lot of
guns though.
> > > Who can make a
> > > claim of sovereignty?
> >
> > Any group of people, no matter how small, whether territorial or not. At the
> > extreme, it must be unanimous consent or else provision must be made to exclude
> > the dissenters from the claimed sovereignty. A properly constituted LMF
> > government must always allow secession by any group that wishes to leave.
>
> Hmm, if I'm accused of a crime, can I secede and thereby escape justice?
Only if you can escape, and your former co citizens (or properly employed
police) don't come find you and remand you back into custody. I don't think the
idea is that secession covers prior acts. But I'm not sure.
This model isn't supposed to be "anarchy", mind you. It does tend to reduce to
something rather close, though, doesn't it?
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
120 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
