Flag.Blackened.net | OBJECTION #2: There will always be disputes between people. This is the nature of man. We need someone to arbitrate those disputes and peacefully and justly reach a settlement of them.

Flag.Blackened.net | OBJECTION #1: In a state of nature man lived in ruthless and uncontrolled competition with his neighbors. Government was formed to combat this destructive tendency, to bring order out of chaos, to provide the minimum order required for social stability.

NotBeingGoverned.com | Every human being is a unique individual. We each have different thoughts, different inspirations, different hair, eye and skin color. These differences should all be embraced as it shows that everyone is bringing a unique and enlightening perspective to the table for humanity. Sadly, those who seek to control us use these differences to put us against each other, and take the heat off of themselves. Throughout the history of imperialism our “leaders” have conditioned us to be frightened and hostile towards those who are not under their rule. That is because our rulers either wish to enslave these other people, or take their land and resources, or both.

KennySuitter | You should never agree to be interviewed by the police. They are there only to gather information to be used against you. If you had committed a crime, they would not hesitate to arrest you. Never talk to the police, simply tell them "I don't answer questions".

DailyAnarchist.com | This language is problematic to anarchists, no? Those little words “taxed” and “regulated” leave the law open to tampering, and the creation of more laws. The law does not decriminalize cannabis in any way; it’s simply re-categorizing criminality. Overturning the law that makes the substance illegal would be preferable, but let’s be real; the state won’t consider legalization of any kind unless it benefits the state apparatus. Decriminalizing cannabis provides no benefit for the state. That is why you see its boot licking cousin “legalization” instead. Legalization at the state level happens in stages once the bureaucrats figure out how they and their friends in certain industries can benefit from it. Read Entire Article

ZeroGov.com | I have been working on a contract that will come to bind you, dear reader. This contract will give myself, and those I employ, the power to seize your property whenever we deem it to be necessary and proper. This contract can be amended at anytime and can only be interpreted by myself, and those I employ.

Flag.Blackened.net | Law relieves people of the need to find ways for peacefully negotiating solutions to their problems. It gives them a club with which they crush their neighbor into submission, and having the club, they use it. In the name of the "law" government can do all sorts of legally atrocious things and with confidence proclaim, "we had a right to do what we did."

GlobalResearch.ca | We turkey-celebrating, obese, sports-addicted, shop-until-you-drop, historically-illiterate couch potatoes are all beneficiaries of the acts of our guilty ancestors who may have been unaware perpetrators of the crimes against humanity that occurred during the never-ending, shameful 500 year-long history of genocide, ethnic cleansing, colonizing and occupation of the people and the land that rightfully belonged the aboriginal tribes that had inhabited North, Central and South America for thousands of years before Columbus (who had no clue as to where he was) and his sex-starved sailors disembarked from their stinking ships and started pillaging the land and raping the most nubile female inhabitants back in 1492. (Soon cutting off the hands of  those  who couldn’t bring in their quota of gold from precious metal-less mines.)

Everything-Voluntary.com | Even people who were seemingly socialized identically can feel moral outrage differently. I consider the existence of the state to be a moral outrage, but my siblings don't. Why do I feel moral outrage toward the state? Probably because I've learned different things about the state than they have. I see state interference in the economy as destructive toward society because I've studied sound economic theory. Indeed, it took economic arguments to get me interested in liberty in the first place. Likewise for parenting. Once I understood the destruction that the practice of punitive parenting creates toward society (micro and macro), I stopped spanking. In both cases, economics and parenting, it wasn't until I understood why certain behaviors were destructive toward something I value - ie. society - that I began feeling moral outrage toward the state and punitive parenting.

ZeroGov.com | How does a person come to hold the belief of absolute nonviolence? What about this belief draws people to it? Is nonviolence the logical conclusion of non-aggression? These are the question that I have been asking myself as of late, because there is a growing number of people within the liberty movement who are latching onto the belief of absolute nonviolence. I’d like to explore this idea, and try to lay out an argument as to why I think it is not only wrong, but also dangerous to adopt this belief.