⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2012-04-19 01:44:44
913
Comment:
|
939
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 7: | Line 7: |
There are criminals today; there is slavery and a sex trade even in "free" countries. When a free society (even a hypothetical one) is compared to a statist one, the comparison should be to what is (or, in the hypothetical, what is likely, which is arguable, and argued). While we expect that a [[Voluntaryist|voluntaryist]] society will be better than a statist one in many ways, it does not ''fail'' merely because it falls short of someone's utopia. | There are criminals today; there is slavery and a sex trade even in "free" countries. When a free society (even a hypothetical one) is compared to a statist one, the comparison should be to what is (or, in the hypothetical, what is likely, which is arguable—and frequently argued). While we expect that a [[Voluntaryist|voluntaryist]] society will be better than a statist one in many ways, it does not ''fail'' merely because it falls short of someone's utopia. ([[DBR]]) |
Fallacy:
Anarchy is bad because there will still be criminals (generalization).
Response:
There are criminals today; there is slavery and a sex trade even in "free" countries. When a free society (even a hypothetical one) is compared to a statist one, the comparison should be to what is (or, in the hypothetical, what is likely, which is arguable—and frequently argued). While we expect that a voluntaryist society will be better than a statist one in many ways, it does not fail merely because it falls short of someone's utopia. (DBR)
In my limited experience, a meta-fallacy of all critiques of anarchy (and indeed, any aspect of individualism or "alternative") is inconsistent bar setting—of attempting to hold the alternative up to a standard the incumbent cannot meet. (ME)