|
|
|
|
|
by wazoox
5322 days ago
|
|
> I just don't find moral legitimacy in being compelled to do things by force without my consent. By force? Were you subject to violence? You're free to head into the wilderness, live from your hunting and start your own civilisation on your own, perfectly free; others did. However it proves more cumbersome and less pleasant than simply living in our oppressive society. I'm perfectly happy with paying taxes, and having roads, policemen, garbage collectors and street lights. What's the opposite stance? > Private roads aren't allowed to exist How so? The path going across my terrain is as private as possible. However private roads aren't really practical. It's commonly known that infrastructure work in general is less efficient when not a monopoly, and so far the only working monopoly is the state (monopoly of violence most saliently). |
|
Other issues are the thicket of regional planning regulations. There's really not truly private property any more, roadbuilding of any type is subject to the state and local political process.