• Non aggression principle

    Something Adam Kokesh often says: You, as a free, beautiful, independent human being own yourself. Therefore it is immoral for any other human being to aggress against you. Government is one of many forms aggression can take, and as an institutionalized violation of rights, has no moral right to exist.

  • Monopolies are inherently inefficient; competition brings innovation, efficiency, and drives down prices.

    Under a system of government, law creation is monopolistic. Additionally, the average person has little to no say about it. Your vote is an insignificantly small percentage of all votes, and on top of that, you really only have 3 to 4 politicians "representing" you at the federal level, where there are hundreds of other politicians.

    If you disagree with a politician and want him gone, your only available course of action (elections) could take decades and billions of dollars before you ever see a result you want, and results are not guaranteed. You could go a lifetime without ever being properly represented.

    Polycentric law, or overlapping, competitive legal jurisdictions, as described by David Friedman in his book, The Machinery of Freedom, is a much more realistic approach to goverance and law creation.

    There would be no politicians and no government at all. A completely voluntary society where defense agencies are private companies which compete for your service, and they rely on private dispute resolution companies and private arbitrators to settle disputes. This creates immediate choice for all individuals (as oppose to waiting years like today), and all legal action is based on victims, as opposed to today, where the government can throw you in jail for performing peaceful, non-violent, victimless actions.

  • It is the only ethical solution

    The government's existence requires that humans be forced to give up their time and energy for the benefit of a ruling class. If you live under government rule, you are forced to pay much of your wage to the government for the purposes of things you may disagree with, such as war or failed social programs. Even if some government programs be good, it is wrong to force people to pay into them. Should I throw you in a cage because you did not donate to the food bank? Does any human have the right to force you into a club by the threat of force? Are governments not made up of people? Do people not have the same rights as others, and no extra rights? Why should a group of people who call themselves the government have rights that none of us have?

  • Voluntaryism Helps Society

    I think voluntaryism can really benefit society. No one likes to be forced into anything. Everyone has a right to not participate if they choose. So voluntaryism allows those that want to participate and will take extra pride in it to do more for the country then those who would just be mailing in the effort anyway.

  • Some level of force is nesseccery

    A certain degree of forced labor is needed in all society to maintain safety and order. Essential services such as police, fire and medical providers are forced by law to help citizenry. As part of the free market system, this contingent of the law is explained before taking such a position.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.